What is current SSPX status.

[ProVobis]

I know that their marriages and confessions are invalid so those would for sure need to be redone.

The faculties to hear confessions come from the Vatican, so even the local bishop wouldn’t be able to grant them in this case.

As far as marriages go, that’s an interesting situation. These are supposedly registered with the Church and they have their own tribunals in cases of divorce and annulments, so I’m not sure about the validity aspect, though they are definitely illicit.

 

[BrianIndy]

I don’t think it is considered schismatic (you don’t lift excommunications from schismatics), but whilst their sacraments are valid they are also illicit. They are in a weird limbo.

What in the world does valid yet illicit mean?

Can you put that in to plain words that a Hoosier can understand?

My brain says something is valid, or it is invalid…what exactly is meant by the term illicit? I always think illicit means illegal…

Thank you

 

[kozlosap]

Pope Benedict XVI tried so hard to work things out with this group and sadly, had no success. Have there been discussions between Pope Francis and SSPX, or has this issue been out-of-sight for the last few years?

It seems that Papa Francis is not interested in playing their power struggle game which I applaud. After almost forty years it appears that the SSPX enjoys causing their little dramas and is not invested in becoming regularised.

 

[ProVobis]

What in the world does valid yet illicit mean?

Can you put that in to plain words that a Hoosier can understand?

My brain says something is valid, or it is invalid…what exactly is meant by the term illicit? I always think illicit means illegal…

Thank you

Illicit means you answer to God for your actions.

Invalid means simply that it never happened.

 

[BrianIndy]

Illicit means you answer to God for your actions.

Invalid means simply that it never happened.

Well that sounds better than some of the other alternatives.

So if I attend a Mass at SSPX chapel, receive the Eucharist, make my reconciliation, do my absolution, and walk out the door only to be hit by a car and killed, I ought to be in pretty good shape with God.

 

[lanark]

What in the world does valid yet illicit mean?

Can you put that in to plain words that a Hoosier can understand?

My brain says something is valid, or it is invalid…what exactly is meant by the term illicit? I always think illicit means illegal…

Thank you

Illegal, yes, I think that might be a good word for it. I remember reading once that protestant baptisms are considered valid because they use the proper form, but they are illicit because they are essentially stealing what was given to the Church.

I don’t want to say much more because all of this makes my head spin too. :hypno:

 

[ProVobis]

Well that sounds better than some of the other alternatives.

So if I attend a Mass at SSPX chapel, receive the Eucharist, make my reconciliation, do my absolution, and walk out the door only to be hit by a car and killed, I ought to be in pretty good shape with God.

Depends on what you mean by “pretty good shape.” I can’t make that judgment.

 

[BrianIndy]

Depends on what you mean by “pretty good shape.” I can’t make that judgment.

Amen to that!

 

[FrDavid96]

The faculties to hear confessions come from the Vatican, so even the local bishop wouldn’t be able to grant them in this case.

First, the individual priest must be reconciled to the Church. Then he has to be granted the clerical state, then (and only then) could a local bishop grant the priest faculties to hear Confessions.

It’s all about the status of the individual person.

As far as marriages go, that’s an interesting situation. These are supposedly registered with the Church and they have their own tribunals in cases of divorce and annulments, so I’m not sure about the validity aspect, though they are definitely illicit.

I don’t know what “registered with the Church” means (are you referring to the priests? or do you mean that the marriages are recorded in Catholic registers? Neither of those happen, so maybe you’re saying something else. If so, what?). The SSPX priests have no ministry in the Church, and they likewise have no faculties to witness marriages. Since a Catholic is required to marry according to canonical form (with certain exceptions, of course, like dispensations and the desert island scenarios) any SSPX attempts to witness marriages are invalid. They can have their own tribunals (no one can stop them) but their decisions are meaningless beyond their own community.

 

[Lormar]

Well that sounds better than some of the other alternatives.

So if I attend a Mass at SSPX chapel, receive the Eucharist, make my reconciliation, do my absolution, and walk out the door only to be hit by a car and killed, I ought to be in pretty good shape with God.

That’s the scary part. You won’t know that for sure until your are face to Face. It will be too late then to turn back. Wouldn’t you rather have the certainty by going to a priest who is authorized by the Church to forgive your sins and be at peace?

 

[FrDavid96]

What in the world does valid yet illicit mean?

Can you put that in to plain words that a Hoosier can understand?

My brain says something is valid, or it is invalid…what exactly is meant by the term illicit? I always think illicit means illegal…

Thank you

It means that the Sacrament happens, but something about that Sacrament is illegal.

For example, it is illegal (illicit) for a priest to use a paper cup instead of a chalice, but the Eucharist is still validly consecrated. Just an example.

 

[FrDavid96]

Well that sounds better than some of the other alternatives.

So if I attend a Mass at SSPX chapel, receive the Eucharist, make my reconciliation, do my absolution, and walk out the door only to be hit by a car and killed, I ought to be in pretty good shape with God.

Not really.

SSPX priests cannot hear confessions. They cannot absolve. Going to an SSPX priest for confession is no different than confession to ones barber or the the guy slicing ham at the deli counter.

 

[porthos11]

Well that sounds better than some of the other alternatives.

So if I attend a Mass at SSPX chapel, receive the Eucharist, make my reconciliation, do my absolution, and walk out the door only to be hit by a car and killed, I ought to be in pretty good shape with God.

Well, that’s the problem. With an SSPX priest, their Masses are illicit (illegal), but they do have the Eucharist, and their Masses are valid.

the problem is with the latter part of your scenario. Confessions administered by the SSPX are invalid (they don’t happen). So if in your scenario, you get hit by a car and die, you are not in an absolved/reconciled state (invalid=it didn’t happen). I wouldn’t want to risk facing God in that state.

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t know what “registered with the Church” means (are you referring to the priests? or do you mean that the marriages are recorded in Catholic registers? Neither of those happen, so maybe you’re saying something else. If so, what?). The SSPX priests have no ministry in the Church, and they likewise have no faculties to witness marriages. Since a Catholic is required to marry according to canonical form (with certain exceptions, of course, like dispensations and the desert island scenarios) any SSPX attempts to witness marriages are invalid. They can have their own tribunals (no one can stop them) but their decisions are meaningless beyond their own community.

That part I understand.

But what about those who “remarry”? Aren’t they supposed to obtain annulments if they have had their (first) marriages witnessed by an FSSPX priest? Those (first) marriages would for the sake of being able to remarry are considered valid, no?

 

[agnes_therese]

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?

There’s no need to speak to every SSPX priest to ascertain a statement that some of them believe x/y/z.

 

[BrianIndy]

Not really.

SSPX priests cannot hear confessions. They cannot absolve. Going to an SSPX priest for confession is no different than confession to ones barber or the the guy slicing ham at the deli counter.

So then the SSPX doing sacraments is not “valid yet illicit”

Is that what you are saying Father?

 

[FrDavid96]

That part I understand.

But what about those who “remarry”? Aren’t they supposed to obtain annulments if they have had their (first) marriages witnessed by an FSSPX priest? Those (first) marriages would for the sake of being able to remarry are considered valid, no?

Of course, there’s always the “if A then B…” when discussing annulments.

Assuming a typical scenario, say 2 Catholics married with an SSPX priest as the officiant/official witness, they would only need an administrative declaration of nullity based on lack of form. It would be exactly the same as 2 Catholic married by a Protestant minister. They were not married in the presence of a minister of the Church, so they are not valid marriages.

Edit: if the couple were never baptized Catholics, and never received into the Catholic Church, then perhaps a marriage by an SSPX priest might be valid. In responding earlier, I was assuming you were asking about a situation where either or both parties in the attempted marriage are actually Catholic.

 

[FrDavid96]

So then the SSPX doing sacraments is not “valid yet illicit”

Is that what you are saying Father?

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.

 

[Lormar]

I almost forgot. The SSPX will be having an Apostolic Visitation shortly. Someone from the Vatican will be visiting each of their seminaries.

 

[dans0622]

I almost forgot. The SSPX will be having an Apostolic Visitation shortly. Someone from the Vatican will be visiting each of their seminaries.

Hello,

Really? I hadn’t heard about that.

Dan