Vatican II and its changes


#41

For Confession only, correct?

Particularly for the grave sin of Abortion, correct?


#42

I think the Pope mentioned that in the same document since abortion is one of those sins which requires/required the bishop to grant such faculties of absolution to the priest, any priest.


#43

You claimed they exercised no legitimate ministry in the Church and you provided links to documents that are years out of date. If you discuss the SSPX you should take the time to learn the current facts. They can absolve sins, marry people and ordain priests thanks to Pope Francis. All of this is legitimate ministry.


#44

Well how about this from 2016 then?


#45

What point are you trying to prove? Your latest article is about the canonical status of the SSPX; it says nothing about their faculties and does not further your argument. You’re conflating to separate issues. Bottom line: SSPX can absolve sins, marry people and ordain priests. Lay Catholics are permitted to attend their chapels and make modest donations.


#46

Let us all keep this words in mind…
"and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it."
Jesus Christ established one church and promised that it would work under the guidance of the Holy Spirit…let us take comfort in that fact and not let the way we “feel” about any one particular pope or another cause us to abandon the truth.


#47

What’ is the point — that the SSPX has been thumbing its nose at every Pope – since the time the SSPX came into existance.


#48

Your post doesn’t make me resent the the SSPX; it makes me appreciate the mercy and patience of our Popes. Furthermore, Pope Francis has demonstrated his paternal affection by granting the SSPX legitimate ministries within the Church.

Lastly, the Church appreciates that the SSPX has legitimate concerns about the way Vatican II has been interpreted and implemented. This is why the Rome-SSPX talks are doctrinal in nature.


#49

It’s not about the mercy extended to the SSPX – but about the SSPX thumbing its nose at the past and current Pope. One may say — biting the hand that feeds it.


#50

There’s a formal word that the Church uses for these practices: Disciplines.

This Catholic Answers tract may help: https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/is-it-a-doctrine-or-a-discipline


#51

Point taken. But since this thread isn’t about the politics of the SSPX I really have no more to say than this:

Pope Francis has given the SSPX faculties. This means any layman or woman can receive Sacraments at their chapels. To connect this discussion to the topic at hand, I’ll end by saying that visiting an SSPX chapel or any of the Ecclesia Dei communities will allow one to experience pre-Vatican II Roman Catholicism. If the FSSP or ICKSP is available, one ought to attend them rather than the SSPX.


#52

While they bite back.


#53

Could you or someone point provide a link or reference to the Vatican granting SSPX permission to ordain priests?


#54

I would like to see this, too. I do recall reading that Pope Francis extended the permission for Confession past the Year of Mercy. And that may have even applied to marriage (but I don’t recall). But I have never seen anything anywhere at anytime where the Vatican has given the SSPX approval to ordain priests.


#55

I found this after a quick google search.


#56

And I found this:


#57

Interesting. It appears to be a report about a private letter sent from the Pope to Bishop Fellay. Perhaps that is why o didn’t come across it. I had been searching the Vatican website for news.


#58

What I find suspicious about this supposed letter – is that when Rome has granted something to the SSPX – it has done so out in the open. As when – Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications – Pope Francis in granting them the confessions. None were done – “behind the scenes”. It would seem – that something like authorizing the ordaining of priests – would have been announced by Rome.


#59

Francis often makes his decisions known through private letters. A perfect example of this is the private letter about Amoris Laetitia sent to the Argentinian Bishops.


#60

Indeed. Another factor is that certain developments remain little known because they are underreported, presumably they go against the “schism” narrative that some are fond of perpetuating. For example, I’ve seen some on this forum argue that the SSPX has no canonical status in the Church, yet in 2015, Rome gave Bp. Fellay canonical jurisdiction over his own priests:

In a nutshell, if an SSPX priest is guilty of a misdemeanor, Bp. Fellay is the one who administers the canonical punishment, and Rome recognizes his judgment as her own. In this matter he (Bp. Fellay) does not need to have recourse to Roman authorities. This was a significant step; as we read in Don Libero Gerosa’s Canon Law,

“With a canonical sentence the ecclesiastical authority recognizes juridically binding facts and guarantees in this manner the objective realization of the ecclesial experience, founded on the authenticity of the Word, the validity of the Sacraments, and all those other elements which concern the common vocation of living the faith in the ecclesial communion, which is always a communio cum Deo and a communio fidelium. These considerations on the declarative nature of the canonical sentence are valid also for the sentence (or decree) pronounced at the end of a canonical penal process[.]”

This positive development, which further confirmed that the Society obviously cannot be in schism, was predictably hardly reported on by the media, and so false information continues to disseminate, which only makes it more difficult to arrive at a full reconciliation.


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.