Vatican Document on SSPX?

[El_PAso]

Hi,

Anyone know of a link to the Vatican website that summarizes the actual status of the SSPX?

I have read a dozen threads and frankly neither side is clear. Terminology vague and legalistic.

I know I can receive the sacrament of reconciliation this year (till Nov.) but the circumstances of Mass and Eucharist less clear. I think I read somewhere valid if an “emergency”?

Please no “opinions” just a link to the official Church stance.

Thanks,

EP

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Hi,

Anyone know of a link to the Vatican website that summarizes the actual status of the SSPX?

I have read a dozen threads and frankly neither side is clear. Terminology vague and legalistic.

I know I can receive the sacrament of reconciliation this year (till Nov.) but the circumstances of Mass and Eucharist less clear. I think I read somewhere valid if an “emergency”?

Please no “opinions” just a link to the official Church stance.

Thanks,

EP

Do you understand the difference between illicit and invalid? That is important. There is no document from the Vatican to post. The situation is confusing, fluid and ongoing.

 

[ProVobis]

The situation is confusing, fluid and ongoing.

Precisely.

 

[FrDavid96]

Hi,

Anyone know of a link to the Vatican website that summarizes the actual status of the SSPX?

I have read a dozen threads and frankly neither side is clear. Terminology vague and legalistic.

I know I can receive the sacrament of reconciliation this year (till Nov.) but the circumstances of Mass and Eucharist less clear. I think I read somewhere valid if an “emergency”?

Please no “opinions” just a link to the official Church stance.

Thanks,

EP

Yes.

It is right here:
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html

The official position of the Catholic Church, as articulated by HH Benedict, is quite clear and unambiguous.

As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.[emphasis added]

There is no other way to put it. “No ministry in the Church” means precisely that “no ministry in the Church.”

Pope Francis’s temporary extension of faculties to hear Confessions is limited to exactly that, and only during the Jubilee Year of Mercy.

 

[RitasKid]

You say that you know you can receive the sacrament of reconciliation this year. True. But I question whether the society’s priests have been given permission to give absolution. My OPINION is that they do not have faculties, the illicit sacrament is being certified valid for the good of the penitent. How’s that for confusing?

 

[FrDavid96]

You say that you know you can receive the sacrament of reconciliation this year. True. But I question whether the society’s priests have been given permission to give absolution. My OPINION is that they do not have faculties, the illicit sacrament is being certified valid for the good of the penitent. How’s that for confusing?

This isn’t about “opinion.”

Absolution is a juridic act of the Church. A priest either has faculties or he does not. The Church’s Law explains very clearly how a priest receives faculties to absolve.

A priest can receive faculties from his Ordinary/Superior, or he can be given faculties by the law itself (or a combination of both).

Pope Francis temporarily extended faculties to the SSPX priests when the Catholic faithful approach them for confession during the Jubilee.

In the meantime, motivated by the need to respond to the good of these faithful, through my own disposition, I establish that those who during the Holy Year of Mercy approach these priests of the Fraternity of St Pius X to celebrate the Sacrament of Reconciliation shall validly and licitly receive the absolution of their sins.

press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2015/09/01/0637/01386.html

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Yes.

It is right here:
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html

The official position of the Catholic Church, as articulated by HH Benedict, is quite clear and unambiguous.

As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.[emphasis added]

There is no other way to put it. “No ministry in the Church” means precisely that “no ministry in the Church.”

Pope Francis’s temporary extension of faculties to hear Confessions is limited to exactly that, and only during the Jubilee Year of Mercy.

Except now they do have a ministry. Created by the pope to hear confessions. I’m glad you posted this. Because now it would seem they do in fact have a legitimate ministry. To use hh exact wording…

 

[thistle]

Except now they do have a ministry. Created by the pope to hear confessions. I’m glad you posted this. Because now it would seem they do in fact have a legitimate ministry. To use hh exact wording…

Only for Confession and only for the Jubilee Year of Mercy. It will cease after that unless SSPX repent and reconcile themselves with the Church.
All their other faculties meantime remain suspended.

 

[ProVobis]

Except now they do have a ministry. Created by the pope to hear confessions. I’m glad you posted this. Because now it would seem they do in fact have a legitimate ministry. To use hh exact wording…

Personally I see this as a bigger step toward full reconciliation as the very validity of this particular sacrament had been under some serious contention to say the least. Come November we’ll know more.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Only for Confession and only for the Jubilee Year of Mercy. It will cease after that unless SSPX repent and reconcile themselves with the Church.
All their other faculties meantime remain suspended.

I doubt very much that it will cease. I think as long as the sspx don’t shoot themselves in the foot. ( they seem to do that). It will quietly continue. It is incredibly interesting though as I’m sure sspx priests hear sspx priest confession. Theoretically an sspx priest could hear a confession of another sspx priest about illicitly saying the mass…
There is incredible irony here. The very criticisms the sspx and many traditionalists have of Francis are that he makes statements and does things outside of the rules. Which he has done here. Driving canon lawyers nuts but nevertheless there it is. He granted them facilities world wide reserved for territorial bishops. I think you will see some sympathetic bishops follow suit. I know of one case where a diocesan bishop has asked the sspx to run a Latin mass. I think Francis also proved that with a simple declaration he could offer all of the full ministry. I will be going to confession this month to an sspx priest. I feel I have the holy father’s permission as this is the ministry he has told them to do! I’m looking forward to a confession and reconciliation that differs from my current one. One that has priests telling people it is ok to sin…

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Personally I see this as a bigger step toward full reconciliation as the very validity of this particular sacrament had been under some serious contention to say the least. Come November we’ll know more.

Yes, but I suspect it will be quiet. Like the original statement was quiet. Almost an afterthought.
IOW it is also putting a clock on the sspx. As long as they keep the rhetoric minimal by thier standards I’d say they have a pretty good shot at a personal prelature. Of course that works both ways. [edited]

 

[El_PAso]

Thanks for the link.

So much for “no opinions”…

sigh…

EP

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I doubt very much that it will cease. [1] I think as long as the sspx don’t shoot themselves in the foot. ( they seem to do that). It will quietly continue. It is incredibly interesting though as I’m sure sspx priests hear sspx priest confession. Theoretically an sspx priest could hear a confession of another sspx priest about illicitly saying the mass…
There is incredible irony here. [2] The very criticisms the sspx and many traditionalists have of Francis are that he makes statements and does things outside of the rules [3]. Which he has done here. Driving canon lawyers nuts but nevertheless there it is. He granted them facilities world wide reserved for territorial bishops [4]. I think you will see some sympathetic bishops follow suit [5]. I know of one case where a diocesan bishop has asked the sspx to run a Latin mass [6]. I think Francis also proved that with a simple declaration he could offer all of the full ministry [7]. I will be going to confession this month to an sspx priest. I feel I have the holy father’s permission as this is the ministry he has told them to do [8]! I’m looking forward to a confession and reconciliation that differs from my current one. One that has priests telling people it is ok to sin…

1. Confession faculties, according to canon 967, are given either habitually or for a time. Pope Francis specified that this concession, that he gave by his personal initiative, is for a time. This is so that Catholics who approach these priests in the Year of Mercy, could actually receive the sacrament of mercy since their absolutions are otherwise invalid. Of course, all marriages witnessed by SSPX priests were, and still are, invalid…and one can proceed to delineate the canonical issues well beyond that.
2. Rather than incredibly ironic, I personally consider the plight of these priests, who persist in living outside of communion with the Vicar of Christ, incredibly tragic.
3. The Pope possesses the fullness of legislative authority in the Church…as he does executive and judicial authority. He does not do things “outside the rules” since he is the one who makes the rules.
4. Granting faculties (not facilities) are not reserved uniquely to diocesan bishops…faculties are granted also by the law itself or by major superiors of institutes capable of incardination. The Roman Pontiff, because he possesses “supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church” (canon 331) can grant faculties to any priest incardinated in any diocese or institute of perfection anywhere. (He can also strip any ecclesiastic of any canonical office or ministry…as Pope Paul VI did to Archbishop Lefebvre and all the priests of the first group of the SSPX seminary in Econe that were ordained priests by the archbishop on June 29, 1976.) In this case, in fact, Pope Francis has graciously acted in favour of priests who even lack incardination at all because their institute has no actual legitimate existence.
5. The matter of the SSPX, by order of the Pope, is reserved to the CDF and to the Ecclesia Dei Commission. Diocesan bishops seeking to regularlize SSPX clergy must have recourse to the Holy See since the matter was reserved to the Holy See by the Pope – and, in order to be reconciled to the Church from whom he has separated himself, the SSPX cleric would have to renounce any allegiance to the SSPX and be incardinated in a diocese or institute of perfection upon which then his faculties would depend.
6. If this has indeed happened, please inform the Nuncio of the country where it occurred.
7. Of course, the pope can unilaterally conclude the issue of the SSPX – just as he could unilaterally make the discipline for Latin Rite Catholics regarding clerical celibacy the same as for Eastern Catholics or alter the nature of how the publicly professed evangelical counsels in East and West are lived or completely revise the concept of clerical incardination. There are any number of things one can do with supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church.
8. The Holy Father’s concern, as he himself expressed it, was that the confessions made by Catholics who were acting in good faith should not be met with an invalid absolution from priests who are, in fact, not in full communion with the Holy See and who lack any legitimate status in the Church. He has hardly given these priests a mandate…he has supplied for the absence of a faculty which rendered their attempt at imparting absolution invalid…a remedy offered for specific and brief occasion.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Thanks for the link.

So much for “no opinions”…

sigh…

EP

That is not quite how the forums work. LOL Sometimes I wish it did. But you have a very complicated question. And there is no real document really dealing with the situation today because the situation changes. You might as well ask for documents on how the Church views the homosexuality issue but no opinions.

You have not answered the question if you understood the difference between valid and licit. It is importnat when discussing the SSPX and I think you may have used one of the words incorrectly. Have you ever read Fr. Z’s blog? It is pretty even handed. Just search SSPX on his blog. Below

wdtprs.com/blog/

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

1. Confession faculties, according to canon 967, are given either habitually or for a time. Pope Francis specified that this concession, that he gave by his personal initiative, is for a time. This is so that Catholics who approach these priests in the Year of Mercy, could actually receive the sacrament of mercy since their absolutions are otherwise invalid. Of course, all marriages witnessed by SSPX priests were, and still are, invalid…and one can proceed to delineate the canonical issues well beyond that.
2. Rather than incredibly ironic, I personally consider the plight of these priests, who persist in living outside of communion with the Vicar of Christ, incredibly tragic.
3. The Pope possesses the fullness of legislative authority in the Church…as he does executive and judicial authority. He does not do things “outside the rules” since he is the one who makes the rules.
4. Granting faculties (not facilities) are not reserved uniquely to diocesan bishops…faculties are granted also by the law itself or by major superiors of institutes capable of incardination. The Roman Pontiff, because he possesses “supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church” (canon 331) can grant faculties to any priest incardinated in any diocese or institute of perfection anywhere. (He can also strip any ecclesiastic of any canonical office or ministry…as Pope Paul VI did to Archbishop Lefebvre and all the priests of the first group of the SSPX seminary in Econe that were ordained priests by the archbishop on June 29, 1976.) In this case, in fact, Pope Francis has graciously acted in favour of priests who even lack incardination at all because their institute has no actual legitimate existence.
5. The matter of the SSPX, by order of the Pope, is reserved to the CDF and to the Ecclesia Dei Commission. Diocesan bishops seeking to regularlize SSPX clergy must have recourse to the Holy See since the matter was reserved to the Holy See by the Pope – and, in order to be reconciled to the Church from whom he has separated himself, the SSPX cleric would have to renounce any allegiance to the SSPX and be incardinated in a diocese or institute of perfection upon which then his faculties would depend.
6. If this has indeed happened, please inform the Nuncio of the country where it occurred.
7. Of course, the pope can unilaterally conclude the issue of the SSPX – just as he could unilaterally make the discipline for Latin Rite Catholics regarding clerical celibacy the same as for Eastern Catholics or alter the nature of how the publicly professed evangelical counsels in East and West are lived or completely revise the concept of clerical incardination. There are any number of things one can do with supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church.
8. The Holy Father’s concern, as he himself expressed it, was that the confessions made by Catholics who were acting in good faith should not be met with an invalid absolution from priests who are, in fact, not in full communion with the Holy See and who lack any legitimate status in the Church. He has hardly given these priests a mandate…he has supplied for the absence of a faculty which rendered their attempt at imparting absolution invalid…a remedy offered for specific and brief occasion.

Regarding number 6.
wdtprs.com/blog/2015/10/sspx-priest-allowed-to-say-mass-regularly-by-italian-archbishop/

The situation is fluid and complicated. It is also muddy and vague. I encourage you also to check out the blog. I would however not recommend SSPX blogs or websites. They can be pretty deep in the rhetoric.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Regarding number 6.
wdtprs.com/blog/2015/10/sspx-priest-allowed-to-say-mass-regularly-by-italian-archbishop/

The situation is fluid and complicated. It is also muddy and vague. I encourage you also to check out the blog. I would however not recommend SSPX blogs or websites. They can be pretty deep in the rhetoric.

Oh, I am quite aware of this. Father Zuhlsdorf explains quite well the ins and outs of this situation canonically, since he himself used to work at the Ecclesia Dei commission a number of years ago.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Oh, I am quite aware of this. Father Zuhlsdorf explains quite well the ins and outs of this situation canonically, since he himself used to work at the Ecclesia Dei commission a number of years ago.

Yes. I love that man.

 

[ProVobis]

Yes, but I suspect it will be quiet. Like the original statement was quiet. Almost an afterthought.

Pope Francis was wise IMO not to have telegraphed the “decree” before he issued it. This way no one saw it coming and therefore not enough counter to mount against him.

 

[thistle]

The bottom line though is that SSPX is in the wrong they have to admit that and repent before they are taken fully back into the fold. It is not the Church who is disobedient. It is SSPX.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The bottom line though is that SSPX is in the wrong they have to admit that and repent before they are taken fully back into the fold. It is not the Church who is disobedient. It is SSPX.

True. The SSPX are “disobedient” as would anyone be if they went against the Church. We do know that some disobedience is tolerated and even celebrated by those higher ups and some are not. Odd your call for repentance given your response in another thread about forgiveness. Are we held to a higher standard that the Church?
I;m curious, would you support communion for the divorced and remarried but require a complete mea culpa from the SSPX?
Personally I wish I had access to the latin Mass. Currently the only way I could attend one would be to go to an SSPX chapel…