Universae Ecclesiae 8 says that those who request Mass and the sacraments in the Extraordinary Form “must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.”
Our friends at Rorate have a translation of an interview with Msgr. Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei“. Here is the first part:
[UPDATED] From an extensive interview granted by the Secretary of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, Mgr. Guido Pozzo, to Nouvelles de France.
“The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.” (Instruction Universae Ecclesiae, n. 19). Is this remark directed at the Fraternity of Saint Pius X?
The article of the Instruction to which you refer is related to certain groups of faithful who consider or propose an antithesis between the Missal of 1962 and that of Paul VI, and who believe that the rite promulgated by Paul VI for the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass is detrimental to the faithful. I wish to make it clear that it is clearly necessary to distinguish the rite and the Missal in themselves, celebrated according to the norms, and a certain understanding and application of the liturgical reform, characterized by ambiguity, doctrinal deformations, abuses and banalizations, events that are unfortunately so common that they led Cardinal J. Ratzinger to speak, without hesitations, in one of his publications of a “collapse of the liturgy”. It would be unfair and false to consider the reformed Missal the cause of such a collapse. At the same time, it is necessary to receive the doctrine and the discipline that Pope Benedict XVI gave us in his Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum for the restoration of the extraordinary form of the ancient Roman Rite and to follow the exemplary manner in which the Holy Father celebrates Holy Mass in the ordinary form at Saint Peter’s, in his pastoral visits, and in his apostolic journeys.
Does the Fraternity of Saint Pius X recognize this missal [of Paul VI] as valid and licit?
It is the Fraternity of Saint Pius X that should be asked that.
Read the rest there.
This does underscore an important question.
I think most members of the SSPX will say that the Novus Ordo is valid. But will they affirm its legitimacy? I have my doubts.
Keep in mind that there is a distinction between the members of the SSPX and the followers of the members of the SSPX. SSPX, or better, FSSPX, is the “Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X”. Fr. Sven O’Brien may be a member, but Mrs. Mary Bagofdoughnuts is a follower.
UPDATE 1607 GMT:
You readers are a great resource! I no soon post this, but several people alert me, as if by magic, to a page on the American District SSPX’s site about this very question. The title of the page: “Is the New Mass legit?” It is a response to UE 8.
Here is something salient:
A. The legality of the New Mass
A law is legitimate only when it is duly promulgated by the lawfully constituted authority. But to this condition must be added another of supreme importance and essential to make it a law: it must be for the common good.1 And precisely on this score, the Novus Ordo Missae (NOM) is most defective as was attested at the time of its promulgation by no less than Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci: … [Though it must be observed that the Lawgiver (the Supreme Pontiff) perhaps thought it was for the common good. Neither Ottaviani and Bacci were the Lawgiver.]
We need to look at the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum (April 3, 1969) which allegedly promulgated the NOM. … [It either did or it didn't.]
Most of the piece focuses on why the Novus Ordo is not as good at the pre-Conciliar form, theological deficiencies, pressure on the Pope, the influence of ecumenism, etc. However, the overall position is that the Novus Ordo, while not very good for us, is nevertheless valid.
Those statements above suggest to me that the person who wrote that page does not think that the Novus Ordo is legitimate. I know this is on the SSPX site for the USA. Does it reflect accurately the thought of the rest of the SSPX’s member and its leadership?