Fr. Z's Blog

From a priest friend:

I had an interesting thought – for the year of mercy, the Pope is allowing the faithful to be validly absolved by priests of the SSPX.

[QUAERITUR:] But what do they think of our absolution?

If a member of the faithful were to go to an average SSPX priest and ask,

I was baptized and confirmed with the new books, I regularly attend a parish in the diocese and am in full communion with the bishop and Pope Francis. I fully support the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I regularly confess to a priest who was ordained using the new ritual – can I approach for Holy Communion, or would I have to confess to an SSPX priest first?

Heh.

I suspect that results would vary.

UPDATE:

I’ve already received a bunch of email in response to this.

Keep in mind: I didn’t write what’s above.  A priest friend wrote it.  That said, I chose to post it, so I get to handle the flak.  That’s fine.  When I get his email I wrote back “Trouble maker!”, and then posted it.

This poke I gave initiated some interesting feedback, especially in the form of the following email from an SSPX priest whose name I will keep to myself.

From the SSPX priest:

I hope this finds you well. Having been a daily reader of your blog since the early days, I have intended to reach out to you for some time, but no subject has piqued my interest as much as this quaeritur and your answer from today. [Already it bears fruit!]
You are obviously a good man and a devoted priest. I wish that there were thousands more like you, especially with the far-reaching public access you enjoy. I know that the slings and arrows must fly at you alarmingly at times because of that public access and your good use of it. Perhaps one day we can sit down to share war stories over a jointly-cooked Sunday Supper, with moderate helpings of alcohol and tobacco. [You’re on!]
But, having captured the benevolentia (so to speak), [In classical rhetoric a speaker usually began with a bid to acquire the good will of his audience.  That’s called a “captatio benevolentiae“.] I have to tell you that your answer to the quaeritur today came off as pretty snide. It’s quite beneath you, Father. [Oh no, dear Father, I can sink much lower.  I usually don’t, thanks be to God.]
This is neither the time nor the medium to delve into the whole complex mess of our place in the Church and our relationship both with Rome and Catholics at large, but, on this point of our acceptance of “NON-SSPX” Catholics, I am astonished that you are so ill informed. [Am I?  C’mon.  Non-SSPX Catholics have always been the prime source of followers of the SSPX, and from the very beginning.] Perhaps you have us mixed up with the sedevacantists, many of whom not only insist that newcomers confess to their priests first but refuse absolution if the penitent attends your Mass or mine. Such has never been our position!  [Even more fruit is born from this post.  For those who are not in the know… there really are differences between the SSPX and sedevacantists, at least officially.  There may be some SSPXers who lean to sedevacantism (the proposal that the See of Peter is empty, that right now there is no legitimate Pope in Rome).  But that is NOT the position of the SSPX nor, I’m sure, the vast majority of their priests.  Remember: lay people are not members of the SSPX which is a priestly society!]
I am not going to be so bold as to deny that one or the other of our priests might have responded in such a way in the bad old days  despite our policy, but such a move, even then, would have resulted in a great deal of hell from the superiors if it became known, and such priests generally left us or were expelled eventually. As of now, I can state confidently that responses would not vary, at least in this country and in Canada.
[NB] We treat every Catholic as a Catholic without asking any questions. (Although, if Ms Pelosi were to show up at my rail, I would not hesitate to refuse her, just as one must refuse anyone who is giving grave public scandal.) [An even better captatio!]
For the avoidance of doubt, and to reiterate what has been our policy since day 1: [NB] We accept the validity of all of the Sacraments conferred according to the new rites. We even defend this validity against the denials of the sedevacantists and those of our faithful who would be happier with the sedevacantists. We do NOT consider ourselves a separate “church” or deny that those who follow the new rites exuberantly are Catholics. We DO think their souls are in serious danger because of the direction they are being led, both by their pastors and by the new rites themselves (not by the rites as such buy by the serious problems  introduced with the “newness”). Because we think they are in serious danger, we do all we can to help them find or rediscover the right direction. We can argue (which I suspect could be quite enjoyable!) about that direction and our manner of doing all we can to help souls find it and persevere in it, but those arguments, to be just, must start from recognizing each other’s basic Catholicity and good will.
I certainly recognize yours, Father! Sometimes I want to shake you by the shoulders [You might not like the results.] — not to attack or punish you but to wake you up to the logical conclusions of what you’re saying. I am convinced that we (and not just you and I) are on the same side in this momentous war. I hope we can gradually but deliberately begin to act like it at all times.
In that spirit, I will be passing though Madison …  [DETAILS REMOVED] . Perhaps we could try to meet up at that time for a visit. [I’m open – if I am in town.] We might even find it in ourselves to have a drink and possibly hear one other’s confessions! [HA!  I see what you did there.] (I detest emojis, but imagine one here to indicate that I’m not trying to be provocative.)   o{]:¬)  
I hope you can reply, but I’ll understand if not. Be assured of my prayers for a fruitful season of  Advent and a holy and blessed Christmas.  [And mine as well.  Invicem.]

There you have some grist for the mill dear readers.   I am delighted that this post elicited this response.