I have several of these in my mail box, similar situations.
From a reader…
QUAERITUR:
I am a lay person who attends a diocesan Latin Mass with my family. On occasion, we attend SSPX Masses or devotions out of necessity or for special reasons (e.g. travelling, a baptism, Mass at our parish is cancelled.)
The recently published procedures for reconciling lay people from the SSPX seems to take for granted that everyone is either SSPX or not; it doesn’t really account for those of us who are comfortable with going to both. Are we good to keep going the way we are? Am I correct in understanding the document that those of us who go to the SSPX on occasion are not really of any concern to the DDF?
I don’t think you have anything to worry about.
Sorry about the short response, but I am packing for a trip.
I’m also sorry for the way this situation has inflicted doubts and anxiety on so many people.
The SSPX cites state of emergency…
Pictures of a young Robert Prevost in a communist rally and kneeling to a S. American idol remain ignored by the Holy See.
Scandalous books by a young Victor Fernandez remain circulating and the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith points his attention to oppress traditionalists.
Germany has broken away from any resemblance of Catholicism and they are only told to stop but never reprimanded.
There was a cocaine fueled homosexual orgy in the Vatican during the previous pontificates rule but no cleric was penalized.
LGBT profaned St. Peter’s and was celebrated by many clerics.
The Black Pope has embraced Liberation Theology and discarded the salvation of souls and his groups pledge to serve the Pope devoutly long ago.
Anyone with an IQ above 60 can see the Church is in crisis and in a state of an emergency and likely led by those who value a compass and square (and cube),
My point is that those handing out penalty’s are observably heretic and have long departed from Catholicism as defined by the deposit of Faith.
One who holds true to the tradition Christs faith as handed down either by epistle or word cannot be excommunicated, especially by heretics…
If you don’t believe me just ask Joan of ‘Arc.
Not according to a stamens by archbishop Hebda
https://www.archspm.org/statement-regarding-priestly-fraternity-of-saint-pius-x/
Maybe someone can explain this to me.
Why would anyone want to receive the Sacraments from the SSPX ,
Who have now clearly lost all faculties. ?
Thank you, Father, for answering this, as our situation is similar, although instead of “occasional”, ours is more “routine” (eg. weekday Masses), but by no means “exclusive” as per your other post on “formal adherence”. I that hope that is still acceptable. We simply want to live as Catholics, nothing more, nothing less.
Wishing you well on your trip.
Can one still fulfill his obligation to attend Mass on Sunday by going to an SSPX chapel?
Thank you for this answer, Father!
@Cratchit
Not answering definitively, but consider the following:
———————–
Can. 1248 §1. A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.
§2. If participation in the eucharistic celebration becomes impossible because of the absence of a sacred minister or for another grave cause…
————————–
Canon 844
Can. 844 §1. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone, without prejudice to the prescripts of §§2, 3, and 4 of this canon, and can. 861, §2.
§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-
Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.
—————
From the Explanatory Note on the Excommunications
Finally, all the faithful are exhorted to…. to refrain from participating in the celebrations and activities promoted by the aforementioned Society of Saint Pius X.
————-
Notice that the Note doesn’t say “may not” and that there are no penalties for participating. That doesn’t mean that the Vatican won’t or your local bishop won’t. Right now, it is just an exhortation to refrain.
Secondly, there currently isn’t anything that says that an SSPX Mass does not fulfill one’s Sunday Obligation. It doesn’t say that the SSPX doesn’t have a Catholic Rite. People might imply that, but the current documents don’t say that. Doesn’t mean that this cannot change either from the Vatican or from your local bishop.
Thirdly, do note that canon 844 talks about “morally impossible” and 1248 “grave cause” are elements that lift the Sunday Obligation. It is possible that if it is decreed that the SSPX Masses do not fulfill the Sunday Obligation, it might very well be the case that one might not have a Sunday Obligation. That is the call of one’s spiritual director — I strongly recommend not making that call yourself for yourself, though things shake out differently if you have authority (ie being a husband /father) over others.
Be mindful and be safe. Stay close to Our Lady.
IIRC and unless I’m mistaken, the SSPX priests whe had been ordained prior to the 1988 excommunications were not considered excommunicated themselves, but only those SSPX priests ordained by those Bishops after their excommunications.
Would the same be true in 2026 and onwards ?
It seems that unlike the five other Bishops, the excommunication of Bishop Fellay is not reserved to the Apostolic See.
Of course, if the Vatican wanted to reduce the number of people going to SSPX chapels and for charity toward the faithful who embrace tradition, it could always repeal Traditionis Custodes and allow more diocesan TLMs.
Instead TC is still in force and many bishops are cracking down on TLMs which will drive more people to the SSPX especially in places where there are no Ecclesia Dei groups operating (FSSP, ICKSP)
@Monstrance
Why would someone want to receive the sacraments from the SSPX now they have lost faculties?
Well my mother in law was elderly and housebound. She asked her parish priest on a home visit to hear her confession. He told her “we don’t do that any more”
It was the priests of the SSPX who stepped in and cared for her.
Things are a lot more complex than people seem willing to acknowledge. Salvation is not “only to be found within the SSPX” but sometimes the Church is negligent and doesn’t do what it is supposed to do.
The faithful are often placed in an intolerable position through no fault of their own.
@Lurker
Forgive me, but these arguments strike me as akin to “sovereign citizen” arguments against civil law. The lawful authorities have put a law in place with an obvious intent, [NO!]and quibbling over the exact words used, turns every person into his own bishop. Authority and law are not about winnowing out magic phrases
[You are confused. In order to know the mens, the mind of, the motive for something the Church’s Legislator (the Supreme Pontiff) wants, directs, commands, etc., you need it to be expressed clearly. We can’t read his mind like psychics. Hence, clear language. Moreover, in interpreting law we use a strict reading when obligations are imposed and a generous, flexible reading when favorable things are granted. This protects the faithful from restrictions of their rights and favors. Laws must be clear in order for the mind of the Lawgiver to be known without guessing. In this case, we have abundant confusion. That can only lead to unnecessary anxiety and confusion.]
Hey Father,
Any expansion on the brief thoughts you provided would be great. Faithful Catholic here that wants to go to TLM and not adhere to schism. Having a trustworthy source at times like this is invaluable and with a family to lead I would personally love a little more clarity. I understand it’s largely messy and chaotic now and that we’re all trying to figure this out but given your background you can parse documents much more clearly and succinctly than others which could be really helpful.
Thanks in advance
Even if one wouldn’t be excommunicated, wouldn’t it now be considered a grave sin to attend Mass and receive the sacraments (outside of danger of death) from the SSPX, since they a) are now in a state of schism, and b) are forbidden by the Church to celebrate the sacraments?
Would this not be a form of cooperation with the sins of their priests and bishops according to the nine ways of being an accessory to someone else’s sins?
[The slipshod way in which the Decree and the Explanatory Note were published has created confusion. The Explanatory Note doesn’t have any legal force. What’s in it is not a “decree”. Moreover, if a Pope gives a faculty to a group of priests, a mere Prefect of a Dicastery can’t by himself take it away. This is a murky situation. And in the case of “murk” the rights of people are preserved not suspended. In the Church law is interpreted as strictly (narrowly) as possible when it comes to things that limit people or impose an obligation.]
To my admittedly uneducated eyes, Pope Leo was very clear. [When was he clear? When he wrote before the consecrations, yes, that was clear. However, there is nothing from Leo since, and those to whom he delegated the decree etc. turned out an in coherent mess. We don’t know what Leo thinks until we get clarity.]
The SSPX is excommunicated by reason of their disobedience to the teaching of the Church, [No, the SSPX is not excommunicated by any decree that we have seen. Have you? An Explanatory Note doesn’t have any force of law.] himself, and his predecessors dating back to St. John Paul. Who, IMO, have exhibited great humility, patience, and fatherly concern in imitation of the Prodigal Son’s father, in the face of continued, blatant, defiance from the SSPX.
There is no question [You like to use absolute terms and the word “very” quite a bit. But it isn’t as simply as you think.]but that attending SSPX liturgies and partaking of Confession to an SSPX priest is out of bounds for any faithful Catholic. [And yet please show me the decree or anything from Leo that takes away the faculty that Francis gave. I’ll wait.]
The Vatican, in fact, has issued very specific instructions to those who have been affiliated with the SSPX – clergy and laity – on how to fully return to the Church and retaining good standing with the Church.
I do not know how it could be clearer.
I am very sorry for those who are hurt by this. But it is my understanding that the Pope never excommunicates anyone. They excommunicate themselves by their knowing, purposeful actions and defiance of Church teaching. They did this to themselves.
Let’s pray for one another. Peace to all here.
@JamesM
I have been avoiding publicly commenting since the consecrations because I tend to lose my cool and type stuff I later regret. But I have to speak up with sympathy.
To be clear, even after I went full time SSPX, my territorial NO pastor heard heard the confessions of my homebound parents and I tithed him. So to say “we don’t do that anymore” is a crock.
I do agree that such a lax attitude is a sign of a crisis, but there are good clergy in places we never consider. I’d wager even liberal Jesuits would find that maddening.
I haven’t spoken publicly about my future plans. I have looked into this from every angle and will only say this: I will do what I do in good conscience. I will only say that when a letter is as clear as mud, I attempt to follow the most logical way forward to my destination.
@Ages
First, we must determine the existence of a fringe on the Vatican Flag and, if present, what color.
But no, seriously, if you start picking at any system of laws, you will notice three things: It matters very much which words are used and where for the normal operation of the application of the Law. The which words and where tend not to force people in power to actually do the things in the Law in the areas where the people in power have an ideological and personal interest that is contrary to the Law. The common people who are subjected to the law by those in power tend to normativize the law and the exercise of power — ie it is true/just because it is written and true/just because it is enforced — people crave psychological stability and by default assume morality is the status quo rather than deal with the chaos of a just dissent. That is just part of the evolved nature of a social species and the reality of social conformity pressure.
Granted, a civilized society needs laws, even the unjust ones, and even the unjust exercises of power, the latter two prudently endured while we work to correct within the system rather than blowing apart the system every single time an injustice crops up. We cannot go around cutting down all the trees in England. IE Revolutions are always bad. Here on the 4th of July, I’d point out that the Founding Fathers understood this for they couched their language not in terms of revolution but in upholding the true meaning of law and God-given rights and restoring those rights to the people of These United States.
For myself, I see the SSPX as following Socrates in his love of Athens and its Laws. Socrates taught because the higher law, his love of wisdom, commanded him to feed his students with the Logos. He went before the lawgivers of Athens and argued his case. He was ordered to drink the hemlock, which he drank. Today, we remember Socrates as the man of justice and his jurors as men of injustice.
There was no rebellion in Socrates from the law of Athens. There is no rebellion in the SSPX from the law of the Church. Both are within the system that they love, and the system crushes them for it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7uqCZCgRKU
Though we will see what history will say of this all and who has the hidden vanity when everything has matured. That will take time and the grist mill of history must grind on.
@redneckpride4ever
I don’t for a second deny that there are many fine priests out there. I am friends with plenty of them.
My point was that there are also plenty of bad priests out there. My mother in law died in December just before turning 91. She was an old and infirm woman unable to travel anywhere. She had managed to persuade a local Carmelite priest to visit her and hear her confession but he stopped when he was warned off by the Parish Priest for “stepping onto his turf”.
Things are far more complicated than any of us would like. I have received nothing but kindness and help from the priests of the society I have met.
I am a faithful Catholic, nothing more and nothing less. I want to get to heaven. What I have heard over the last few days has scandalised me to an extent I have never experienced before. The celebration at my potential excommunication from many Catholics has been nothing other than disgusting.
I have been living in Ireland since 2021. For me to get to a canonically regular Traditional Mass involves me travelling through at the minimum of 3 dioceses to get to it. The geographically closest one actually involves me crossing an international border.
In spite of that, I consider myself a faithful son of the Church. I have been wrestling with my conscience to the extent I have felt physically sick all of yesterday and today. I am trying to find the best way forward in a scenario rooted in legalism which means my having to approach thing legalistically. Do I go to the Saturday Vigil irreverent Novus Ordo Mass and offer up any scandal I experience. Then having demonstrated I am not a schismatic go to Mass with the SSPX on Sunday to offer due worship to God?
I have been wrestling with all sorts of scenarios and ultimately I am in a mess that is not of my making. The sincere lack of charity from so many Catholics has made this all so much harder than it needs to be.
I would sincerely appreciate the prayers of anyone willing to offer them for me.
It seems that when it comes to the SSPX a lot of Catholics, including the Vatican, are quite ready to be quite rigid and “judgmental” when I thought that in the “spirit of Vatican II” we were supposed to be flexible and non-judgmental. This is a very sad time for the SSPX and, while I don’t support them, I suggest a measure of charity would be appropriate. Frankly, I think that the SSPX would have less support if the cruel, dishonest, and completely unnecessary Traditionis Custodes was removed and the Traditional Latin Mass was again freely available and not only based upon the whim of the local bishop.
Thank you JamesM
@JamesM
To clarify, what you were told by the priest was a crock being told TO you. Any priest that would say that when an eldery woman needs confession is trying to feed you a crock, and thank God the SSPX was there for her.
I always try to reiterate that the source of a Catholic priest should be seen individually as to moral character. Put simply, just because I went full tilt Trad does not change the fact that my territorial pastor will always be a far holier man than I.
Rest assured you have my prayers.