SSPX


#1

If the SSPX believe the new mass is invalid, does that make the Eucharist and all the prayers , rosaries and devotions said at the new mass invalid also?


#2

The SSPX don't believe the Novus Ordo is invalid, as much as it's liturgy doesn't reflect Catholic doctrine concerning the Eucharist as clearly as the traditional rites of the Church; aside from this there is a debate over whether "Pro omnibus" (for all) instead of "Pro multis" (for many; which is what Our Lord actually said) in any way affects the Consecration of the Precious Blood.

Secondly, there is no such thing a a "valid" or "invalid" or a devotion. A Sacrament is an outward sign which signals a spiritual or (in the case of the Eucharist) substantial change in the person or matter upon which the Sacrament is conferred; a sacrament is either valid or it's not. A prayer on the other hand has no such criteria -it is the asking for graces, even if the Novus Ordo is invalid, devotions and private prayers would not be (directly*) affected.

God Bless,
CC

*While invalid sacraments would not affect the "validity" of a Rosary (for instance), they certainly would harm one's soul, and thus might very well be damaging to one's prayer life.


#3

[quote="Crusading_Canuk, post:2, topic:279305"]
A prayer on the other hand has no such criteria

[/quote]

Well, actually I have my doubts as to the validity of some prayers, such as praying for your opponent to break his legs, for example, but I don't think this is what the OP had in mind. Your other points seem reasonable.


#4

[quote="Crusading_Canuk, post:2, topic:279305"]
The SSPX don't believe the Novus Ordo is invalid, as much as it's liturgy doesn't reflect Catholic doctrine concerning the Eucharist as clearly as the traditional rites of the Church; aside from this there is a debate over whether "Pro omnibus" (for all) instead of "Pro multis" (for many; which is what Our Lord actually said) in any way affects

[/quote]

From the SSPX website, their FAQ pages.

Consequently there is always a doubt as to the intention of the priest in the celebration of the New Mass and sacraments, which does not in any way exist in the traditional rite. The only way to have moral certitude of valid sacraments is to assist at the traditional rite of Mass. Although theoretically it would be possible for a priest to celebrate sacrilegiously in the traditional rite by having a positive counter intention, it is hardly likely, given that the correct intention is repeated several times, which is not the case in the new rite. To the contrary, it is very likely that a Novus Ordo priest celebrate invalidly through lack of intention, since the full and correct intention is not included in the texts of the New Mass.

So they do believe that priests who celebrate the OF most likely are doing so invalidly as they claim the correct intent is lacking due to the texts.

Its just a funky way around but it still says that they believe that the OF is not a valid Mass.

EDIT: The quoted portion above can be found here, Catholic FAQs: Sacramental in answer to the question If intention is necessary for the validity of the sacraments, how can we ever be sure that the sacraments we receive are valid?

Also note that while this webpage is entitled "Catholic FAQs" it is the SSPX website so it does not reflect the true Teachings of the Catholic Church (at least in this case).


#5

Just wondering, I have read a lot of SSPX stuff on different site’s, some of it is pretty militant about the new mass and the RCC Church being false and a invalid mass.


#6

I think you’ll find the opinion is all depending on an individual member of the SSPX. I know some who DO think the OF is valid, and some who won’t even utter “novus” from their lips. I’ll leave the debate to some other more knowledgeable people on the forum.


#7

[quote="LoyalViews, post:6, topic:279305"]
I think you'll find the opinion is all depending on an individual member of the SSPX. I know some who DO think the OF is valid, and some who won't even utter "novus" from their lips. I'll leave the debate to some other more knowledgeable people on the forum.

[/quote]

Some have been known to use the term "bogus" instead; but they were sedeprivationists not SSPX'ers. :P


#8

Since when did the sspx’s belief’s determine the legitimacy of the Church and the sacraments?

Anyone who denies the validity of the Ordinary Form of the Mass is standing on ground that does not belong to the Church.


#9

[quote="Timothysis, post:8, topic:279305"]
Since when did the sspx's belief's determine the legitimacy of the Church and the sacraments?

Anyone who denies the validity of the Ordinary Form of the Mass is standing on ground that does not belong to the Church.

[/quote]

:thumbsup:


#10

This needs to be qualified in light of Lumen Gentium.


#11

[quote="Exsilivm, post:10, topic:279305"]
This needs to be qualified in light of Lumen Gentium.

[/quote]

Can you explain why this is the case?


#12

Because LG stakes a claim to a wide swath of ecclesial territory.


#13

[quote="Exsilivm, post:12, topic:279305"]
Because LG stakes a claim to a wide swath of ecclesial territory.

[/quote]

Care to post specifics? I'd love it if you could extrapolate the point a bit further.


#14

I agree, despite what the website says. I also think most don’t dwell on the topic either. Unfortunately there are the few on both sides who will go out of their way and try to provoke the other side. This only makes full reconciliation that much harder.


#15

[quote="Melchior, post:13, topic:279305"]
Care to post specifics? I'd love it if you could extrapolate the point a bit further.

[/quote]

I am not sure I can do LG justice. I'll try to post the link here: vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Hopefully that worked:blush:

Take a look at part 8 especially.

Also, we have to consider the effect of Orthodox-Catholic ecumenism, which takes place in the absence of reciprocal acceptance of sacraments. In brief, many Orthodox cannot accept the validity of Catholic sacraments. However, given the Joint Declaration of 1965 (part of V2), is this "Catholic ground?"


#16

Br. David, a distinction needs to be made.

The SSPX consider that intention may be lacking for various reasons. However the form is valid, and so with proper intention and proper matter, the OF is valid according to the SSPX. They never call it the "OF" of course.

They also avoid the newer rites of ordination. However they do not re-ordain priests who come to the SSPX after being ordained in the new rite (except on rare case-by-case bases).

Also to answer the original question, the other prayers are not "valid" or "invalid" as that terminology applies to sacraments. They can be fruitful devotionally but this is for each individual in terms of preparation, reverence, intention and so on.

Some SSPX priests even have said that one can go to the OF to fulfill one's obligation if no TLM is available -- though most would say never to do this.

So it's not clear at all.

In any case I can't see how one can say the the NO can be instrinsically invalid and not be a sedevacantist. After all a rite promulgated by the Pope (which the OF is) must be valid.

The SSPX is officially not sedevacantist, they recognize Benedict XVI and that's why they are having talks with the Holy See.


#17

[quote="newyorkcatholic, post:16, topic:279305"]

The SSPX is officially not sedevacantist, they recognize Benedict XVI and that's why they are having talks with the Holy See.

[/quote]

Actually the SSPX prays for him at every Mass, and sedevacantists have been expelled from the Society!


#18

Thank you for the reply's, I asked because I don't know. i have had a conversation with a few SSPX members and they have told me the RCC and the new mass is invalad and they have gone as far as to tell me that the last rwo popes where false popes and the RCC is no longer Catholic but a false religion. So my argument was basically if 100 people are at mass, they all are praying to God, praying the our father, so if you believe it is a false mass, and not Catholic any more, then does God no longer hear those prayers? They could not answer.


#19

[quote="kelcca, post:18, topic:279305"]
they have gone as far as to tell me that the last rwo popes where false popes and the RCC is no longer Catholic but a false religion.

[/quote]

Why do you even bother with them? Anyone who would say such a thing is hopelessly ignorant.


#20

I have had a sedevacantist friend telling me his view and I'm a bit confused. As Catholics, we are to submit to the Pope and any orders/rules/changes he gives us as Catholics are suppose to be valid because they are given to him by the Holy Spirity, right? I mean, if in fact V2 is invalid, were they not anti-Popes? I'm not trying to stir the pot but I have concerns now about my faith and I really want answers. I would of never had spoken out about our Pope but what my friend say, makes sense. Also, like it was said earlier, about SSPX, if you're going to talk against the Pope, you're not Catholic... if in fact he IS a Pope.

Let me clarify, I'm NOT sedevacantist!!! I just want answers to clear my mind.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.