Skip to main content

SSPX, Confession and the Year of Mercy

+
JMJ

What is the official position of the Church on the sacraments that normally require jurisdiction to be valid (ie Matrimony and Penance).

Up to today - nothing.

As of today - not what most people think ...

"A final consideration concerns those faithful who for various reasons choose to attend churches officiated by priests of the Fraternity of St Pius X. This Jubilee Year of Mercy excludes no one. From various quarters, several Brother Bishops have told me of their good faith and sacramental practice, combined however with an uneasy situation from the pastoral standpoint. I trust that in the near future solutions may be found to recover full communion with the priests and superiors of the Fraternity. 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."Source: Rorate-Caeli

Now what is the difference ... well there is an 'uneasy situation' concerning their pastoral situation. For Fr. Zed and CMTV, you need to re-read the document because it neither says the SSPX is in schism, nor does it state that their confessions are invalid.


For the record here is the SSPX communique (also from Rorate):

The Society of St. Pius X learned, through the press, of the provisions taken by Pope Francis on the occasion of the upcoming Holy Year. In the last paragraph of his letter addressed September 1, 2015, to Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization, the Holy Father writes:

«I establish that those who during the Holy Year of Mercy approach these priests of the Society of St Pius X to celebrate the Sacrament of Reconciliation shall validly and licitly receive the absolution of their sins.»

The Society of St. Pius X expresses its gratitude to the Sovereign Pontiff for this fatherly gesture. In the ministry of the sacrament of penance, we have always relied, with all certainty, on the extrdaordinary jurisdiction conferred by the Normae generales of the Code of Canon Law. On the occasion of this Holy Year, Pope Francis wants all the faithful who wish to confess to the priests of the Society of St. Pius X to be able to do so without being worried.

During this year of conversion, the priests of the Society of St. Pius X will have at heart to exercise with renewed generosity their ministry in the confessional, following the example of tireless dedication which the holy Curé of Ars gave to all priests.

Menzingen,

September 1, 2015] [SOURCE]


Here's Fr. Zed's opinion:
Along with this, the fact of Pope Francis’ move, together with the wording, confirms what I have been saying all along about the priests of the SSPX: they do not and have not had the faculty validly to absolve sins!  The fact that this is being granted for the Year of Mercy bears out what I have been saying. (source)
Can you spell "confirmation bias"?  It says that there is an uneasy situation, period end-stop. For the duration of the Holy Year, the 'uneasy situation' will be removed.

Now of course CMTV will also issue their own perspective on reality.
The sacrament of confession is known as a juridical act. To absolve sins, one must not only have received holy orders, but have faculties from a bishop in communion with Rome. The SSPX bishops do not have jurisdiction and are not in full communion, so the priests of the SSPX have never been able to absolve sins in confession. (Source)
Let's have a little fun with this.  CMTV claims that the SSPX is in schism. However, Fr. Zed does not believe them to be in schism - otherwise their confessions would be valid (ala Orthodox). So why do they believe that the SSPX confessions etc are invalid?

Anyway, as usual they are operating under a confirmation bias and need to examine the conditions for supplied jurisdiction in regards to confession and matrimony. Although of late (probably since people have realised the sand that CMTV's opinions rest upon) they have now trotted out the 'illicit' mantra.

Really, the extent some people will go to maintain their perception of reality when it is contradicted.

This next quote caught my eye:
They are notable for declaring the missal of Paul VI to be evil and a threat to the Faith.
Well, as we know, CMTV used to think that the NOM was a threat to the Faith, but then again if you build upon sand - the winds of time will re-orient you.  Also, given that evil is the absence of a due good (SSPX understanding) then yes the NOM is 'evil' in that it represents a dramatic departure from the Theology of the Mass as defined by the Council of Trent (thank you Card. Ottaviani).

For the coup de grace we have:
 The SSPX still needs to bring itself into full communion with the Church to be fully integrated in the life of the Church.

Funny, that isn't what Bishop Schneider said in the 'clarified' interview. I believe it was something like there is no serious reason why the SSPX shouldn't be given (hint: By Rome) and Canonical Structure.

At least they let off the 'schism' label and returned to the actual status the ever ambiguous "not full communion".

I believe that the comm boxes will be a twitter (pun intended) on various sides of the spectrum in order to re-imagine this action by the Pope.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...

Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum

 + JMJ  Now THIS is probably the most important news item in the last two years - yes I place this above the pandemic. I'm only surprised by how long it took for this to surface during this pontificate. I hope and pray that it is false or that if it comes to pass that somehow some good will arise out of the ashes of Summorum Pontificum. P^3  Courtesy of Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (Updated) Update (May 26): Rorate's additional sources in Rome have confirmed this Wednesday that Francis has indeed a text on Summorum Pontificum lined up, which has been developed for months, but what is not known at this point is if the text is just about a more limited take on the Summorum application questionnaire (first revealed by us in the spring of 2020) or about an overhaul of Summorum Pontificum in general: drafts could be dealing with both matters. It is also not impossible for a text to come ou...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Rome and the SSPX - the latest

+ JMJ Bishop Fellay gave a conference late last month and provided some more insight into the situation with Rome. There are comments on Deus Ex Machina Blog  and Hilary White has now entered the fray. What is one Catholic to think about all these opinions? What a Catholic is to think: With the Church! What does the Church think about obedience?  Virtue as it is? If there is no proximate occasion of sin and the other conditions are met, then one cannot resist the command.