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

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...

Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin - July 6, 1988

There has been some discussion (read lots) about the term 'Conciliar Church'. I have posted this letter written by the Superior General and District Superiors of the SSPX after the 1988 Consecrations. Of particular interest is that the 'Conciliar Church' being referred to as a system. My paraphrase would be that the SSPX regards the 'conciliar Church' as an error within the Church. Source Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 6b: Principles and Rules for Surviving this Crisis of the Catholic Church (Principle 1)

 + JMJ Principle 1: Realize that something is amiss in the Catholic Church The world in which I had my Traditional Awakening, is one in which practically anything pre-Conciliar such as liturgy, doctrinc, and even dogmas are either suppressed, ignored or re-framed to be acceptable to the ‘world’. What is more, the people adhering to these pre-conciliar teachings and liturgy are persecuted by other members of the Catholic Church. The things that non-Trads say about Trads can be quite extreme. For example, accusations against Traditionalists include that they are: A revival of the Jansenists (link) , Schismatics, Heretics, Uncharitable, Lefebrists Radicals Integrists When one group of Catholics is persecuted by the others for simply wanting to live as Catholics before them did for generations … well something is wrong. Further, we need to realize that when what was previously condemned is now promoted and what was previously promoted as the trut...

How is the SSPX prepared to accept the Second Vatican Council??? - Reblogged and Updated.

+ JMJ The Archbishop remained steadfast. In the 1980s, in his correspondence with then-Cardinal Ratzinger, Archbishop Lefebvre stated his position that the criterion for interpreting Vatican II in light of Tradition comprises three elements: 1) He and the SSPX would accept anything in Vatican II that is clearly consistent with Tradition; 2) Any ambiguous texts of Vatican II must be interpreted strictly according to Tradition; according to the consistent teaching of the Church throughout the centuries. 3) Anything in the Council that cannot be interpreted according to Tradition should be revised. The Archbishop laid this out explicitly in his letters to Cardinal Ratzinger in 1982 and 1985. CF News: Rome-SSPX: Background to the Doctrinal Discussions CF News: The April 15 Deadline A few years ago Tony La Rosa (aka ecclesia militans a Toronto based 'resistor') had a difficult time accepting this approach to the council. He held that it must be completely tossed as...