My mistake! I meant to write “First Confession”.The only sacraments that would need to be administered, should anyone in the SSPX return to the Church, are Matrimony and Confession. First Holy Communion - no, and I don’t know where you got that from. Unless I am misunderstanding you?
Sedevacantism isn’t an officially recognised position of the SSPX, but there are some members who would subscribe to it. This is just the way it is, they aren’t totally all uniform to the exact same cause. You will see this with the material they release on the internet.Do you have any facts to back these statements up? You know this how? Have you personally spoken to every SSPX priest to ascertain these statements?
Thank you…so we can see there is no “one rule fits all” when it comes to the SSPX…and we as logical humans have a hard time grasping that sometimes…I know I certainly do. It’s that whole gray area that makes it confusing.It depends on the Sacrament.
Consecrating the Eucharist does not require that the priest be a priest of the Church (ie have the clerical state) for it to be valid. When they consecrate the host, it is validly consecrated.
On the other hand, in order to validly absolve the priest must have faculties from the Church. He must have faculties, or the attempt at absolution is null and void. It’s not only illicit, it’s outright invalid.
It is simply not possible to make a blanket statement about the SSPX that goes like this: “valid but illicit.” People post that all the time, but it’s not possible to say that accurately.
What they do is always illicit (outside of danger of death), because they exercise no ministry in the Church. That’s true always. But is it valid? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
No. That’'s not the case.Thank you…so we can see there is no “one rule fits all” when it comes to the SSPX…
It’s not a gray area at all. It’s very clear:and we as logical humans have a hard time grasping that sometimes…I know I certainly do. It’s that whole gray area that makes it confusing.
I attend a diocesan church for Sunday Mass but there is a SSPX chapel nearby and they offer the Extraordinary Mass (which is not really Mass since the SSPX is celebrating it?) which I do enjoy…but the diocesan church does not…luckily there is a diocesan church on the other side of town that has the EF every Sunday…should I get the urge to drive over there instead of almost walking to the OF Mass nearby.
Since you know it’s an SSPX chapel, there can be no legitimate reason to go there and actively participate.It’s confusing.
What makes it seem confusing is that the SSPX are very well educated and highly skilled at manipulating words and manipulating situations and persons. It is not confusing, but they make it appear confusing.… It’s that whole gray area that makes it confusing.
…
It’s confusing.
Yes, they are.What makes it seem confusing is that the SSPX are very well educated and **highly skilled at manipulating words and manipulating situations and persons. ** It is not confusing, but they make it appear confusing.
Whether they have a picture of the Pope in their chapels or not does not change 2 simple facts:I don’t recommend that folks here attend SSPX chapels, but if they’re really schismatic, then why do they have a picture of the Pope in their chapels? Do the Orthodox have a picture of the Pope in their churches? Somehow I think not…
I didn’t say anything about canonical status or the exercise of ministry. I was referring the issue of schism.Whether they have a picture of the Pope in their chapels or not does not change 2 simple facts:
- The SSPX has no canonical status in the Church
- The SSPX priests exercise no ministry in the Church
Its really hard to figure out. They say they are not Sedevacanist… but do they submit to our Pope… no. Then they are rebellious! If he is the Pope, and you admit that, but will not come under his authority!?I don’t recommend that folks here attend SSPX chapels, but if they’re really schismatic, then why do they have a picture of the Pope in their chapels? Do the Orthodox have a picture of the Pope in their churches? Somehow I think not…
OK then, I’ll answer your questions directly:I didn’t say anything about canonical status or the exercise of ministry. I was referring the issue of schism.
Since you asked why, I’ll answer: Because the SSPX are deceptive and manipulative. They want to deceive Catholics into thinking that the SSPX has some canonical status in the Church or that their priests exercise some legitimate ministry in the Church.I don’t recommend that folks here attend SSPX chapels, but if they’re really schismatic, then why do they have a picture of the Pope in their chapels?
OK. So you’ve proven that the Orthodox are more honest and trustworthy than the SSPX. I’ll make a note of that for future reference.Do the Orthodox have a picture of the Pope in their churches? Somehow I think not…
Father…I’m CONFUSED.What makes it seem confusing is that the SSPX are very well educated and highly skilled at manipulating words and manipulating situations and persons. It is not confusing, but they make it appear confusing.
They want you to be confused. That’s what they do. They are very, very good at it.Father…I’m CONFUSED.
So I will avoid the SSPX chapel. I know for sure my local parish is good to go to…no confusion there. It’s just not the EF I prefer…but I’m good with it anyway.
I think that’s extremely harsh and uncharitable.OK then, I’ll answer your questions directly:
Since you asked why, I’ll answer: Because the SSPX are deceptive and manipulative. They want to deceive Catholics into thinking that the SSPX has some canonical status in the Church or that their priests exercise some legitimate ministry in the Church.
OK. So you’ve proven that the Orthodox are more honest and trustworthy than the SSPX. I’ll make a note of that for future reference.
In fact, if you go to this Mass, or any other SSPX function, you also impact on the souls of other people. Even if you aren’t wavering about your Catholic Faith, and are only going out of curiosity, there may be others who are shaky, who may not have a parish connection or doctrinal formation as you do, and they will see you as another SSPX supporter. If they happen to recognize, and perhaps admire you, they may be confirmed in a path that is not to their spiritual benefit.No. That’'s not the case.
I wrote that “valid but illicit” cannot be applied to every situation.
It’s not a gray area at all. It’s very clear:
Since you know it’s an SSPX chapel, there can be no legitimate reason to go there and actively participate.
- The SSPX has no canonical status in the Church
- The SSPX priests exercise no ministry in the Church. No ministry.
It is a true Mass; meaning that it is valid. However, it is always illicit (illegal) and attending & participating always puts ones soul in jeopardy.
Wow. Sounds about right. How this all started was I am in a facebook group that is designed to motivate Catholics to know their Faith, and some of these SSPX folks have come along. Getting them to give a straight answer is like pulling teeth. I was trying to find out the truth about them. It is hard to get straight answers out on the Internet. Thanks for all the help. Couldn’t have imagined this question would get over 50 replies…OK then, I’ll answer your questions directly:
Since you asked why, I’ll answer: Because the SSPX are deceptive and manipulative. They want to deceive Catholics into thinking that the SSPX has some canonical status in the Church or that their priests exercise some legitimate ministry in the Church.
OK. So you’ve proven that the Orthodox are more honest and trustworthy than the SSPX. I’ll make a note of that for future reference.
Not only do they not exercise a legitimate ministry in the Church, they pull people away from local, legitimate ministries and, sometimes, sound doctrinal formation. They muddy the waters for people by spreading suspicion of their local Catholic pastors, bishop, and the Pope. People they influence benefit less from the Church. They play into the current “herd mentality” fostered by the Media and the Church’s enemies, to oppose Catholic Church authority.I think that’s extremely harsh and uncharitable.
It’s true that they do not exercise a legitimate ministry in the Church. But to treat them as if they’re evil, or lepers to be avoided at all costs is unwarranted. It goes against the virtues of faith, hope and charity to adopt such an attitude.