Youth attending mass at SSPX chapels to "keep their parents happy"

[Dee_S]

This personal testimony by a young girl who grew up in the SSPX and is now at odds with them, after having discovered (thanks to her Catholic fiance, now her husband) that the SSPX have no canonical status in the Church. They chose to be married by a diocesan priest, rather than by the SSPX priests who only perform marriages as “civil celebrants”, lacking the faculties necessary for it to be valid.
catholicculture.org/commentary/the-city-gates.cfm?id=592

She was accused of “being ungrateful for my schooling and to my parents” by an SSPX priest and was told her husband was a “danger” to her faith.

She claims that many of the new generation Y of the SSPX are losing their faith…

 

[Neal76]

Not to be the devil’s advocate (since the position no longer officially exists), but if the youth at SSPX chapels are sometimes losing the faith and only go to Mass to keep their parents happy, does that really differentiate them “regular” Catholic youth?

 

[GospodiPomiluj]

She was accused of “being ungrateful for my schooling and to my parents” by an SSPX priest and was told her husband was a “danger” to her faith…

I wonder if Saint Paul’s parents said the same thing. Or if any of those ancient pagans he converted had angry parents.

BTW, I am a convert… educated in Lutheran schools and have Lutheran parents… but the whole “offending parents if you convert” idea is rather weak. You have to cut the umbilical cord sometime, and usually good things happen to both parties when you do, although it may undoubtedly take time. Also, my mother goes to Mass sometimes, sometimes by herself, and prays the Rosary.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Not to be the devil’s advocate (since the position no longer officially exists), but if the youth at SSPX chapels are sometimes losing the faith and only go to Mass to keep their parents happy, does that really differentiate them “regular” Catholic youth?

No, and, yes, the mainstream church is no better off.

However, I recall from my own encounter with SSPX 15 years ago they present a picture of their seminaries, convents and families flourishing while the post Vatican-II church whithers, with the differences being due to Tradition versus Vatican II and Novus Ordo. So, if their families lose the faith as badly as the rest of us then it undermines their self-portrait.

 

[Cojuanco]

No, and, yes, the mainstream church is no better off.

However, I recall from my own encounter with SSPX 15 years ago they present a picture of their seminaries, convents and families flourishing while the post Vatican-II church whithers, with the differences being due to Tradition versus Vatican II and Novus Ordo. So, if their families lose the faith as badly as the rest of us then it undermines their self-portrait.

It seems in many ways that rebellion can be its own punishment.

 

[Dee_S]

Not to be the devil’s advocate (since the position no longer officially exists), but if the youth at SSPX chapels are sometimes losing the faith and only go to Mass to keep their parents happy, does that really differentiate them “regular” Catholic youth?

The Holy Father, Pope Francis, talks frequently about the Devil.
“We can safeguard the Church, we can cure the Church, no? We do so with our work, but what’s most important is what the Lord does : He is the only One who can look into the** face of evil** and overcome it. The** prince of the world** comes but can do nothing against me: if we don’t want the prince of this world to take the Church into his hands, we must entrust it to the One who can defeat the prince of this world. Here the question arises: do we pray for the Church, for the entire Church? For our brothers and sisters whom we do not know, everywhere in the world? It is the Lord’s Church and in our prayer we say to the Lord: Lord, look at your Church … It’ s yours. Your Church is [made up of] our brothers and sisters. This is a prayer that must come from our heart”.
wdtprs.com/blog/2013/04/pope-francis-the-devil-and-you/
…so “the position” does officially exist…and is in the news almost daily.

Now, to play the devil’s advocate myself, how do we define what is meant by “regular Catholic youth”? Those in the “mainstream” Church perhaps?

 

[bben15]

Let us review what you just said here.

A woman finally decides to stop supporting the disobedient and radically traditionalist SSPX and starts going to diocesan Masses instead of illicit Masses.

I can’t find anything wrong with that. I think the husband is making her faith grow rather than disintegrating it.

God is above our parents. If our parents want us to attend SSPX Masses, and God wants us to attend licit Masses, whom do we obey? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

 

[Lormar]

Many of the new generation Y of SSPX are losing the faith. Among my friends, few knew who the current pope is, let alone who their ‘local’ bishop is. Many have had enough of SSPX’s rigid, strict ways, especially regarding women for the strictness of dress. One inch too short, etc., and you are told you’re immodest!

I somehow doubt that the identify of our Holy Father is unknown to them since his picture hangs in all of their chapel vestibules. Also, even if this is true for some, I don’t think they are any different from the Catholic youth who attend public schools. How many of them know who the pope is, or the bishop, or even care?

I also doubt what she says about the strictness of women’s dress. Those days in the SSPX are long gone. The majority of the women who attend, from what I have recently learned (and even I was shocked to hear this) dress up only for chapel functions and wear pants the rest of the time.

In any event, I am glad she found a good, Catholic husband. And her parents should be too!

 

[Fairwinds]

Not to be the devil’s advocate (since the position no longer officially exists), but if the youth at SSPX chapels are sometimes losing the faith and only go to Mass to keep their parents happy, does that really differentiate them “regular” Catholic youth?

tu quoque is not a valid argument.

 

[Phyllo]

I would attend an SSPX Mass if one were offered where I live. From what I understand the problem with them is they don’t want to have anything to do with Vatican II. I happen to agree with them. They just prefer the old way as do I.

I would like to have a Larin Mass in my neighborhood but the pastors here said no.

Is the Mass they sat actually illicit? Is there some authority that says so

Thanks

 

[Fairwinds]

I would attend an SSPX Mass if one were offered where I live. From what I understand the problem with them is they don’t want to have anything to do with Vatican II. I happen to agree with them. …

is this what it means to be a traditional catholic?

 

[bben15]

I would attend an SSPX Mass if one were offered where I live. From what I understand the problem with them is they don’t want to have anything to do with Vatican II. I happen to agree with them. They just prefer the old way as do I.

I would like to have a Larin Mass in my neighborhood but the pastors here said no.

Is the Mass they sat actually illicit? Is there some authority that says so

Thanks

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI declared that they have no ministry in the Church. The Masses they offer are valid, but illicit. Until they come into full communion with the Church, their Masses are illicit. It is not recommended that you receive the Eucharist at their Masses.

 

[Cojuanco]

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI declared that they have no ministry in the Church. The Masses they offer are valid, but illicit. Until they come into full communion with the Church, their Masses are illicit. It is not recommended that you receive the Eucharist at their Masses.

Also, their marriage ceremonies lack canonical form as the priests have been stripped of their faculties, and their absolutions are similarly invalid. They may no longer be excommunicated, but like many other dissenting clergy, they are suspended a divinis.

Phyllo, the Second Vatican Council is as valid and authoritative an ecumenical council as the Council of Trent was. To deny its authority seems schismatic at best and heretical at worst.

If you prefer the Extraordinary Form, that does not necessitate the rejection of an ecumenical council. There are priests worldwide who celebrate the Latin Mass and are in full communion with the Holy Father. Perhaps you do not live near any of them. But that is no excuse to break communion with the successor of Peter.

 

[bben15]

Also, their marriage ceremonies lack canonical form as the priests have been stripped of their faculties, and their absolutions are similarly invalid. They may no longer be excommunicated, but like many other dissenting clergy, they are suspended a divinis.

Phyllo, the Second Vatican Council is as valid and authoritative an ecumenical council as the Council of Trent was. To deny its authority seems schismatic at best and heretical at worst.

If you prefer the Extraordinary Form, that does not necessitate the rejection of an ecumenical council. There are priests worldwide who celebrate the Latin Mass and are in full communion with the Holy Father. Perhaps you do not live near any of them. But that is no excuse to break communion with the successor of Peter.

The FSSP runs many traditional churches. All their sacraments are valid and licit.

 

[Esrb99]

Also, their marriage ceremonies lack canonical form as the priests have been stripped of their faculties, and their absolutions are similarly invalid. They may no longer be excommunicated, but like many other dissenting clergy, they are suspended a divinis.

Phyllo, the Second Vatican Council is as valid and authoritative an ecumenical council as the Council of Trent was. To deny its authority seems schismatic at best and heretical at worst.

If you prefer the Extraordinary Form, that does not necessitate the rejection of an ecumenical council. There are priests worldwide who celebrate the Latin Mass and are in full communion with the Holy Father. Perhaps you do not live near any of them. But that is no excuse to break communion with the successor of Peter.

Careful, now. Merely attending an SSPX chapel out of devotion to the Extraordinary Form is not grounds for ‘broken communion’. While its easy to confuse the finer points in the whole SSPX debacle, claiming that attending mass there-even once-is a schismatic act is not only wrong in the eyes of Rome, but spreads misinformation about the Society and leads to hurt feelings on both sides of this tense discussion.

 

[Cojuanco]

The FSSP runs many traditional churches. All their sacraments are valid and licit.

That’s what I meant. But there are quite a few parish priests who do so as well. Also some members of religious orders (round here, it’s the Norbertines).

 

[Phyllo]

Also, their marriage ceremonies lack canonical form as the priests have been stripped of their faculties, and their absolutions are similarly invalid. They may no longer be excommunicated, but like many other dissenting clergy, they are suspended a divinis.

Phyllo, the Second Vatican Council is as valid and authoritative an ecumenical council as the Council of Trent was. To deny its authority seems schismatic at best and heretical at worst.

If you prefer the Extraordinary Form, that does not necessitate the rejection of an ecumenical council. There are priests worldwide who celebrate the Latin Mass and are in full communion with the Holy Father. Perhaps you do not live near any of them. But that is no excuse to break communion with the successor of Peter.

I understand that the council was pastoral and the changes made were made in the spirit of the council and not mandatory.

What is the difference between valid and licit. If a Mass is valid why would it be called illicit

And yes I guess I would call my self a traditionalist. That is the way I was brought up and I thank my Carholic school and parents for this.

There is a Latin Mass about an hour away a d sometimes I go to the high sung Mass and it is beautiful.

Just my opinion

God Bless

 

[PaulinVA]

What is the difference between valid and licit. If a Mass is valid why would it be called illicit

I believe validity concerns whether the Orders of the priest are valid - was he validly consecrated due to intent, form, etc.

The licitness of the act has to due with whether he has the authority to perform the act - has a Bishop or ordinary granted jurisdiction.

 

[Phyllo]

I believe validity concerns whether the Orders of the priest are valid - was he validly consecrated due to intent, form, etc.

The licitness of the act has to due with whether he has the authority to perform the act - has a Bishop or ordinary granted jurisdiction.

Thanks for the explanation.

God Bless

 

[Ghislieri]

Keep in mind, faithful Catholics can attend a Mass at a SSPX chapel. Rome has allowed this.

I think the bigger issue, to move beyond the SSPX (I don’t mean to hijack the thread) is how many plain ol run of the mill Catholics have their kids attending diocesan Masses jusy to make their parents happy? The SSPX issue is a speck on the radar compared to the overall crisis in the Church.