Official communiqué of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter

As we wait for the next shoe to drop – something from the Congregation for Religious – there is this official news from the FSSP

Official communiqué of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The Coming Storm and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. rtjleblanc says:

    Hmmm. Maybe. But it’s hard not to be suspicious. It’s hard not to feel that the Pope is OK with the FSSP for now, as long as they don’t become too popular. And it’s hard not feel that this might well just be a case of “keeping your ‘enemies’ closer”.

  2. kyle says:

    Could we also assume that this would apply to ICKSP parishes as well?

  3. WVC says:

    I have no good will or benefits of doubts left for Pope Francis. When he says that the gesture of fidelity to the papacy should be “preserved, protected and encouraged” I hear “you better toe the damn line exactly or punishment will be swift.” When he assures them that the current abomination of a Motu Propio does not effect them, I hear “because I’m gonna handle you people in a completely separate manner.”

  4. Archlaic says:

    The next shoe, er… “papal slipper” seems to be a decree from Franciscus whereby he condescend to grant the FSSP, by his benign authority, the privilege of faculties to use that which they already possess by virtue of particular law and established custom!

  5. HyacinthClare says:

    FSSP congregations have been praying and sacrificing intensely since July all over the world. We bless God for this. NOW we must decide how to defend diocesan priests who want to say the holy mass, and how to defend the rest of the smaller Ecclesia Dei communities. This is not even the end of the beginning yet.

  6. Paperman says:

    Huge development!

  7. SeelDad says:

    This is very good news. I couldn’t help but notice that the Holy Father’s decree is dated 2/11/22 – the same day the FSSP completed their novena and consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

  8. summorumpontificum777 says:

    Very magnanimous of him to “grant” them something that they’ve always had, but I guess, at this point, we should take the victories where we can get them.

  9. roma247 says:

    OK but how does that work?

    If they are allowed to use the old Pontificale, but they don’t have any of their own bishops, then… what? A loophole? Or another “you can, but only on paper…”

    If they are allowed to use the old Pontificale, then it can’t be abrogated.

    Sigh. I’m tired of these games.

  10. Lurker from the East says:

    I imagine that this is welcome news, but it also seems to reinforce in its own way the notion that the offering of the TLM is contingent upon receiving permission to do so. Or am I reading too much into this?

  11. Pending further developments, of course, should we now advocate for a kind of “third order” affiliation with the FSSP, for the benefit of those of us diocesan clergy who are happy to provide the Mass and sacraments in the ancient form, yet face many of the faithful who want the Mass, especially, according to the 1970 Missal?

    This development seems to present clergy and seminarians with a tough choice: either a path along which you may never be allowed to partake of the ancient forms, or a path along which that is all you may do. If I were a vocations director for a diocese, I would not want this landscape, because some number of otherwise desirable candidates would look at it and say, thanks but I’ll go FSSP.

    I, for one, would be very interested in being a third-order member of the FSSP. I think many other diocesan priests would pursue it.

    Another thought: does anyone at all think that the pope and other higher ups would refuse an FSSP cleric who said, may I occasionally celebrate Mass and sacraments in the contemporary forms?

    In other words, if you want more options for the future, go FSSP (or a like institute).

  12. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    In the linked unofficial English version of the Decree of 11 February, what is ther character of “except for the celebration of private Masses” (in the official Latin, “excepta Missae privatae celebratione”) – is that an innovation, and a restrictive one?

  13. Gigot says:

    FSSP Reprieve – Deo gratias, a light in the Pachamama-darkness. Hopefully prog bishops will not expel them anyway. We faithful could worship in caves… or construct priest-hideouts in our homes.

  14. ZestyLemonZach says:

    I’m surprised he’s not wearing his signature grumpypants look, being in the unfortunate presence of rigid trads and all.

  15. Dustin F, OCDS says:

    Not wanting to verge into conspiracy territory here, but am I the only one who thinks the picture of the two priests with the pope looks kind of odd? Like, photoshopped even? The lighting is kind of strange. I had to look closely at it to figure out whether that was actually Pope Francis or one of those cardboard cutouts you see everywhere.

  16. teomatteo says:

    Dustin, I thought the same thing. The ‘image’ of the Holy Father looks like he’s 5 years younger. My impression.

  17. Chrisc says:

    Father fox, how does it work if a priest is affiliated with a group as a third order or oblate or a member of some other group? Can you fulfill your clerical obligations by saying the breviary of the group? Can you celebrate the rituals of the group or only those approved by the bishop?

  18. Chrisc:

    I don’t know that much about how third orders work, other than being a third order member associates you with that group’s spirituality and practices in a come-and-go sort of way. That’s why I spoke of a “kind of” third order arrrangement with the FSSP, so that diocesan priests could have some flexibility. If I gave the impression of being especially knowledgeable about third orders, I apologize. I’m not a third order anything, despite many invitations.

  19. mibethda says:

    To add to the equation, on February 8 of this year, Pope Francis received Father Pagliarani, the Superior General of the SSPX in a private audience.

  20. jhayes says:

    The FSSP says:

    “Not being a religious order, we do not run a third order as such, but we could offer our faithful the support of a sodality….

    Please note that the Confraternity is not for lay Catholics only. From the beginning, consecrated persons, either religious or clerics, have been expected to join as well.

    The sodality is the Confraternity of St. Peter.

  21. Public Savant says:

    Stay on that reservation now ye hear, and don’t even think about finding a new one.

  22. Josephus Corvus says:

    I’m thinking that this may have been done for one reason only. What is the alternative? If right now today he throws a bunch of restrictions on the FSSP or shuts them down, there is as good chance that many of those priests will go right back to SSPX and he would rather not be the recruiting arm for them since then he loses all control. Now he can address the FSSP “issue” by creeping incrementalism. Every so often add another “minor” change or restriction with the threat of pulling this permission if they don’t.

  23. matt from az says:

    FSSP is now controlled opposition and will start doing the Pope’s dirty work of undermining all other traditionalists.

Comments are closed.