Why can Catholics receive at SSPX but not Orthodox?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rooneyt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rooneyt

Guest
So to the best of my understanding, the Eastern Orthodox Churches and SSPX are in the same legal standing-- valid, but illicit.So why is it the case that practical Catholics can receive the Blessed Host at a SSPX Parish and not at an Orthodox Parish?
 
Rooneyt said:
So to the best of my understanding, the Eastern Orthodox Churches and SSPX are in the same legal standing-- valid, but illicit.So why is it the case that practical Catholics can receive the Blessed Host at a SSPX Parish and not at an Orthodox Parish?
Click to expand...
They do not have the same legal standing.
Eastern Orthodox churches are “Churches”. They have all valid sacraments. They are fully in union with an ancient, apostolic Church, united under valid ordinaries, both clergy and lay members. They just are not in union with Rome. The Catholic Church has no jurisdiction over them in terms of sacraments, etc. Besides dioceses, they also have their own parishes, with pastors.

The SSPX is not a “Church”. They do not have lay members. They “recognize” the validity of the ordained bishops of the Catholic (and probably Orthodox) Church, but are not themselves under any ordinaries. In other words they regard Bishop X as **an **ordinary, but not their ordinary, though they may choose to agree with him on some things.

They have validly ordained clergy, and under certain circumstances, some sacraments there are valid. All SSPX members - that is, clergy and religious, as well as any non-member but personally loyal or attached laity, are theoretically under their local RC ordinary. Depending on the individual, and depending on the bishop, they may regard their local ordinary as more or less agreeable or relevant ** for them**; but the priests don’t necessarily accept the authority of the RC ordinary downtown, over them. Laity loyal to SSPX may choose to belong also to a Catholic parish. Then they would be under a pastor. The SSPX does not have pastors, as such, since there is no ordinary to appoint them. Chapels do have priests to offer spiritual guidance.

The SSPX does not have parishes, they have chapels. They do not have dioceses; again, it is a religious order. The SSPX does have discussions at times with the Vatican, but as a Catholic group, not ecumenical discussion. It is not “under” the Vatican office that oversees religious orders, though the SSPX may choose to follow RC canon law, in some matters. The pope can grant permission for SSPX priests - Catholic clergy - to hear confessions. He has no relationship to EO clergy.
 
Rooneyt said:
So to the best of my understanding, the Eastern Orthodox Churches and SSPX are in the same legal standing-- valid, but illicit.So why is it the case that practical Catholics can receive the Blessed Host at a SSPX Parish and not at an Orthodox Parish?
Click to expand...
Are you familiar with “Have you stopped beating your wife?”?
 
Jon_Mallory said:
ah, the loaded question. There is no good answer to this one.
Click to expand...
Thank you. 🙂

But at the same time, I’ve thought of an example that may be more helpful to this thread then what I said before: Lutherans consider Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican sacraments to all be valid; so a Lutheran could say “They all have the same legal status, so logically either I can receive communion in all of them, or I can receive communion in none of them.”
 
Peter_J said:
Thank you. 🙂

But at the same time, I’ve thought of an example that may be more helpful to this thread then what I said before: Lutherans consider Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican sacraments to all be valid; so a Lutheran could say “They all have the same legal status, so logically either I can receive communion in all of them, or I can receive communion in none of them.”
Click to expand...
You can’t equate “legal status” of a religious group, with “is it permissible or prudent or whatever for me to receive Holy Communion there?” Not everything that is permissible is prudent.

It depends partly on my own church’s jurisdiction of me; and partly on recognizing the jurisdiction of the church I am visiting - and sometimes, why I am visiting.

One’s home denomination might have no problem with my receiving Communion at that other denomination if that denomination welcomes me to do it. It also matters whether there is an emergency type situation. But even there, just because the only church available to me this Sunday is this other denomination, I can still attend service there without taking Holy Communion.

The larger issue is that we live in an age of entitlement. I remember sermons in the 1950s where the priest had to urge the older parishioners to come up for Holy Communion more frequently. We have gone to the opposite extreme now, when everybody claims to have a “right” to Communion anytime, anywhere they please.

But the original thread refers to the SSPX, which is not a denomination.
 
That’s what I heard too but out of curiosity, why do you say “rightly so”?
 
commenter said:
It depends partly on my own church’s jurisdiction of me; and partly on recognizing the jurisdiction of the church I am visiting - and sometimes, why I am visiting.

One’s home denomination might have no problem with my receiving Communion at that other denomination if that denomination welcomes me to do it. It also matters whether there is an emergency type situation. But even there, just because the only church available to me this Sunday is this other denomination, I can still attend service there without taking Holy Communion.
Click to expand...
Exactly. (I mean all of that, not just the last sentence.) 👍
 
The Orthodox are in schism. The SSPX are canonically irregular, but they are not in schism. You can receive the sacraments from schismatics only out of grave necessity.

Here’s good post (although out of date, since they now possess faculties to absolve):

wdtprs.com/blog/2015/09/sspx-not-in-schism/

Do some digging around that blog to understand a bit more of the ins and outs of the issues with attending SSPX chapels.
 
e_c said:
The Orthodox are in schism. The SSPX are canonically irregular, but they are not in schism. You can receive the sacraments from schismatics only out of grave necessity.

Here’s good post (although out of date, since they now possess faculties to absolve):

wdtprs.com/blog/2015/09/sspx-not-in-schism/

Do some digging around that blog to understand a bit more of the ins and outs of the issues with attending SSPX chapels.
Click to expand...
And the EO view Rome as in schism so it’s doubly so that it would be inappropriate.
 
From the Catholic Church’s perspective, a Catholic can receive the sacraments at an Orthodox church if there is no Catholic church available (which might be the case on small Greek island or in a small town in Russia where the Orthodox are prominent and Catholics less so). But most Orthodox churches would not give communion to a Catholic. Nonetheless, it is not Catholic canon law but Orthodox practice stopping you.
 
Most would (I understand there have been some exceptions), but the point is that from the stand point of canon law, there is no difference between a Catholic receiving at an SSPX parish or an Orthodox church.
 
peter26 said:
Most would (I understand there have been some exceptions), but the point is that from the stand point of canon law, there is no difference between a Catholic receiving at an SSPX parish or an Orthodox church.
Click to expand...
There is a difference, the SSPX are irregular, the Eastern Orthodox churches are in schism.
 
Orthodox Churches are in schism with what? Orthodox Churches never answered to the bishop of Rome. They always had their Patriarchs and presiding arch-bishops that led them independently.
 
peter26 said:
Most would (I understand there have been some exceptions), but the point is that from the stand point of canon law, there is no difference between a Catholic receiving at an SSPX parish or an Orthodox church.
Click to expand...
Not sure the point of your question, but re: the title of the thread, it is inaccurate to say Catholics can receive at at SSPX. It is also inaccurate to say SSPX priests can offer public Masses, since they have no permission from any ordinary. The thread title assumes something that is not true. If you are in doubt, consult your diocese.
 
True, they are not; but it is nevertheless true to say that Catholics can make the request.
 
peter26 said:
Most would (I understand there have been some exceptions), but the point is that from the stand point of canon law, there is no difference between a Catholic receiving at an SSPX parish or an Orthodox church.
Click to expand...
The priest at the Orthodox church is not in any way under RC Canon Law, or the RC ordinary. He is under the jurisdiction of his own Canon Law, and his own ordinary.

(The SSPX does not say they operate parishes, they have chapels and other places of ministry and worship.)

The priest at the SSPX is under the jurisdiction of RC Canon Law, and the local RC ordinary. Canon Law presupposes the virtue of prudence. The actions of one Catholic should not encourage another Catholic to break Canon Law. Attending the public Mass of a SSPX priest who is, according to Canon Law, not allowed to say public Masses, would be an imprudent action for me.

If all Catholics were mindful of and heeding RC Canon Law, no one would be at his public Masses and he would likely consider another course of action. It is likely there would have been many additional SSPX chapels and Masses than now exist, except for the fact that many Catholics are more or less aware of and heeding Canon Law.

My attending Mass, or Divine Liturgy, at an Orthodox Church would not have the same effect on the priest as attending Mass at SSPX, assuming I am a stranger to both men. Whether I should attend, and whether I should receive Communion there, are separate questions and different criteria apply than do at the SSPX.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top