A reader sent me a link to a site and say "Now I’ve seen everything." The site is sspxsingles.com. Though I can understand the reason for the site. It is annoying to advertise yourself as SSSPXWF (Single Society Saint Piux X White Female) in the local newspaper in their singles section.
I wonder if there is a Sedevacanist Singles for those who go further than most in the SSPX and say there hasn’t been a valid pope since Pope Piux the XII. Maybe a dissidentsingles.com for those of the progressive bent.
Ironically those looking to get married within an SSPX chapel will end up staying single. Marriages in an SSPX chapel are invalid and illicit. They do not have the faculties to hear confessions or to perform marriages from the local ordinary. Other sacraments are valid though.
29 comments
I think you’re off a little in your post, Jester. The SSPX singles website obviously wouldn’t allow women to post ads. They can only respond to ads that men post. Either that or their fathers respond for them.
I kid, I kid.
-L
Wouldn’t the marriage only be illicit not invalid, as it is not the priest who confers the sacrament, but the couple themselves?
“According to Latin tradition, the spouses as ministers of Christ’s grace mutually confer upon each other the sacrament of Matrimony by expressing their consent before the Church”
[ CCC, 1623 (The Celebraton of Marriage)]
T,
No since Catholics are obliged to follow Canonical form. For example annulments are granted because a Catholic was married outside of a church without permission of the local ordinary. The canonical form of marriage must be followed (unless dispensed).
I see, thanks, I didn’t realise supporters of the SSPX could put themselves in such serious situations.
Craziness
Sadly, the SSPX have gone even further than their own marriages, with the “St Charles Borromeo Canonical Commission” which purports to recognise nullity in marriages and to dispense from religious vows. Where Abp. Lefebvre himself sent any dubious case directly to the Roman Rota, the Econe leadership now seek to keep everything in-house, without any reference to Rome at all.
These guys are my ‘favorites’. The last one I met not only maintained that JPII was “damning Catholic souls to Hell” with his laxarian ways, he was also kind enough to inform me that my grandfather (who raised me, was a Sunday School teacher and a Marine who served his country in 3 wars) had no hope of Heaven because he was a Protestant (raised that way from birth).
Hopefully I won’t be thinking of these people in my final moments.
I am concerned about attempts to bring them back to the Church. On the one hand, of course they should be brought back if possible. On the other hand, I’m afraid of the poisonous influence they might bring.
To be fair, Adeodatus, those who have come home from the SSPX have done lots of good. Look at the FSSP, or the Institute of the Good Shepherd, or indeed the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer (on Papa Stronsay). If the SSPX or a large part of it can be brought in, they could do great good for the Church; it is certainly worth praying and hoping for.
When I saw “SSSPXWF”, I thought a new wrestling federation had been created. Hmmm…there’s some parody material for ya.
An SSPX marriage may be “annullible,” but all putative marriages are assumed valid unless and until they are annulled. I wonder how often such marriages actually are annulled on the basis of improper canonical form?
Apparently there has already been trouble over this.
At least twenty years ago, persons who had previously been married in SSPX chapels, approached diocesan authorities seeking annulments in order to marry under diocesan auspices. They were advised that an annulment was not necessary, because the marriage was already invalid.
These situations rattled on SSPX priest so much, that he had his sister get married at a parish church, and then come to the SSPX chapel for the Nuptial Mass and blessing.
Daniel – we have the same thing happening in our little town. An SSPX priest is trying to get our parish priest to “marry” his sister in the sacristy before he (the SSPX priest) does the Nuptial Mass. Our pastor said no…..
Here’s a question: what about an SSPX marriage that was valid civilly? How, and to what extent, does the Church recognize a valid civil marriage, should it end in divorce or whatnot, and then one of those two seeks to marry in the Church?
Also, I’ve seen that ad before and clicked it, and the site is just a generic singles site. I suspect as many URLs redirect there as there are “groups” of singles looking to date. Of the SSPXers I’ve encountered, I can’t imagine any of them using such a site anyway. Somehow the SSPX doesn’t strike me as a group that would be keen on internet dating.
Well, there is a sede community site:
http://tradcircle.ning.com/
Here’s a question: what about an SSPX marriage that was valid civilly? How, and to what extent, does the Church recognize a valid civil marriage, should it end in divorce or whatnot, and then one of those two seeks to marry in the Church?
From a civil standpoint, SSPX marriages are valid, and would have to be dissolved in a civil court. Members of SSPX chapels get civil marriage licences like everybody else.
AIUI, from an ecclesiastical standpoint, marriages performed in SSPX chapels are invalid, because Catholics are supposed to be according to the form prescribed by the Church, and under the juristiction of the local ordinary, who is the primary legislator in matrimonial matters. (I am not a canonist, and would be interested in a canonist’s take on it.)
The SSPX would probably defend the validity of marriages performed in their chapels by pointing to supplied juristiction in extraordinary circumstances, and IIRC, Michael Davies made an argument based on the “moral impossibility” of using diocesan parishes.
To me, this brings up a couple of issues:
If the SSPX is in schism, then haven’t members of SSPX chapels repudiated the Catholic Faith, rendering SSPX marriages equivalent to Eastern Orthodox marriages? (Which are recognized by the Catholic Church as valid and sacramental.)
Would the issue be different for a person who joined an SSPX chapel as an adult, than for a person who was brought up in it?
Does the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, by legalizing the former ritual, remedy defect of form?
Somehow the SSPX doesn’t strike me as a group that would be keen on internet dating.
When I was a young traditionalist in the late 1970s-early 1980s, there were a couple of groups encouraging young traditionalists to correspond, partly with the idea of finding spouses for one another.
One of the things traditionalists want to preserve is the Church’s customary prohibition on religiously mixed marriages, and common sense dictates that if you are a serious supporter of the SSPX, marrying a guitarist from a local diocesan parish might be a wise choice. Nor would marrying a follower of a sedevacantist group. (Which might think the SSPX is a group of liberal modernists.)
Except in a few places, one is unlikely to have regular contact with SSPX supporters, and this could be problematic for a young person who wants to marry, and marry “within the Church”.
So as I see it, it seems natural that someone would set up a dating site for SSPXers looking for a compatible spouse.
if the SSPX is in schism, then haven’t members of SSPX chapels repudiated the Catholic Faith, rendering SSPX marriages equivalent to Eastern Orthodox marriages? (Which are recognized by the Catholic Church as valid and sacramental.)
Members of the SSPX would argue that they are the only ones still clinging to the Catholic Faith. Many of them therefore hold the SSPX to be a separate and distinct Church. Those who do not are similar to the Anglicans, many of whom believe they are catholic and think of the Church as encompassing the Roman, Orthodox and Anglican traditions. I would think, therefore, that their marriages would be viewed the same way we consider all our separated brethren (Orthodox, Anglican, Protestant) that two Christians, following their consciences and the precepts of their faith, are validly and sacramentally married.
Would the issue be different for a person who joined an SSPX chapel as an adult, than for a person who was brought up in it?
A formal defection from Catholic Church and subsequent formal entry into another faith community ends the binding of Canon Law upon the conscience of that individual. I believe it would be the same in this case.
Does the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, by legalizing the former ritual, remedy defect of form?
The former ritual required the witness of a properly ordained minister in communion with the Catholic Church. Therefore the ritual witnessed by an SSPX priest would still have defect of form, however it would not affect validity due to the aforementioned reasons.
Cardinal Hoyos has said at least seven times this year that the SSPX are not in schism. They are inside the Church. It is an internal matter that deals with an irregular situation.
I am not an SSPX member, but as a Trad, I support their impressive courage.
SSPX marriages are valid because they have supplied jurisdiction provided by Canon Law. Canon Law 144 supplies jurisdiction. They do not have the ordinary jurisdiction from an ordinary, but because of the state of emergency in the Church and the world at large, supplied jurisdiction is given to the SSPX for the salvation of souls.
First, the sspxsingles site is not an SSPX site; it is operated by an individual, who does not even have the SSPX’s permission to use its acronym.
Second, the ministers of the sacrament of marriage are the spouses; the priest simply acts as the Church’s witness, and sanctions and blesses the marriage. Hence, in an extraordinary situation (i.e., no priest is available), the spouses can validly marry themselves without a priest (as was done by Japanese Catholics when they had to be without a priest for 100 years).
In effect, that is what the couple does when they are married by a priest of the SSPX (who can claim supplied jurisdiction) since they are unable to approach the ordinary authority for contracting marriage (due to the required Pre-Cana classes that erroneously teach the reversal of the ends of marriage and the disastrous NFP program, etc., plus the fact that often the couple cannot obtain the traditional Nuptial rite, unless under the auspices of compromise with the doctrinally-deficient Novus Ordo Missae, all of which are dangers to the Faith and even towards a proper preparation for “the Great Sacrament”).
As for the validity of supplied jurisdiction of SSPX priests, Fr. Angles’ study (http://www.sspx.org/MISCELLANEOUS/validity_of_confessions_1.htm) proves this from canon law (both the old and new codes). This also proven by the fact that Rome told the Gabon bishops to register the marriages witnessed by the SSPX priests (http://www.sspx.org/discussions/sspx_update.htm#rome_approves) and that the Campos priests were not required to have the marriages they witnessed (performed) re-blessed.
The final argument is though, and this seems to escape many Catholics amongst the wild charges of schism and excommunication, if the SSPX were in schism (excommunicated), per canon law, this canonical situation would *automatically render all of the marriages as valid* since the SSPX would no longer be under the auspices of the Catholic Church. For instance, does any Catholic for a second accuse the schismatic (and heretical) Orthodox of having invalid marriages due to a lack of jurisdiction (which they have technically lacked since 1054 AD)? One cannot have it both ways: that the SSPX is in schism, but a rule that only applies to Catholics (and not schismatics) still sticks!
In the end, as Fr. Angles proves: either a) the SSPX is in schism, hence the marriages are automatically valid; or b) the SSPX is not in schism (which is the case), and its priests are exercising supplied jurisdiction, hence the marriages are valid.
I hope that this helps to clarify this canonical issue.
Matt & Rafael,
It does not matter whether the SSPX is in schism or not. The fact is that their priests do not have faculties from their local bishop. Thus they can not validly perform marriages or hear confessions. Just as a priest from another diocese cannot perform a marriage without permission from the local ordinary. So the issue of schism does not matter here.
When at least one part of a couple getting married is Catholic they are obliged to follow canonical form and the Church has the authority to regulate marriages for Catholics. Without canonical form the marriages are invalid. So the point that it is the couple that confer the sacraments forgets that the Church has the authority to regulate marriages.
“It does not matter whether the SSPX is in schism or not. The fact is that their priests do not have faculties from their local bishop. Thus they can not validly perform marriages or hear confessions. Just as a priest from another diocese cannot perform a marriage without permission from the local ordinary. So the issue of schism does not matter here.?
If this statement is true, how do you explain then the validity of marriages and confessions performed by the Orthodox?
Or better yet, that the Church allows a Catholic to receive in case of emergency the Last Rites (which includes confession) from *any priest*, be he censured, laicized, schismatic, or excommunicated?
Louis,
The Orthodox are not Catholics and thus do not come under juridical rule. Same as for any non-Catholic individuals. The Orthodox certainly don’t see themselves as coming under Canon law since they don’t follow the Pope. Church law applies to those who are Catholic not others.
Last rites do not require faculties from their local bishop. Any valid priest can do this in an emergency. Confession and marriage do require this.
Jeff,
The SSPX have supplied jurisdiction. It is true that they do not have the faculties of their local bishop, but they get it fom supplied jurisdiction because the supreme law of the Church is the salvation of souls according to canon law 1752.
Due to the state of emergency in the Church, the SSPX priests do not have the ordinary jurisdiction from the local bishop but have supplied jurisdiction given by Jesus and canon law 144 of the Church.
The marriages, confessions, and other sacraments performed by SSPX priests are valid due the faculties given by supplied jurisdiction that subsitute for the ordinary jurisdiction that they would have in normal times.
In the time since the Second Vatican Council, many Catholic souls have cried out for the traditional Mass, the traditional sacraments, the traditional practices—in short, the traditional faith—in order to save their souls, and have been denied by their local ordinaries. The Society of St. Pius X, seeking to carry out the normal mission of the apostolic church, has responded to these pleas in charity and with supplied jurisdiction.
The Vatican’s Ecclesiae Dei commission said
“The Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony however, require that the priest enjoys the faculties of the diocese or has proper delegation. Since that is not the case with these priests, these sacraments are invalid. It remains true, however, that, if the faithful are genuinely ignorant that the priests of the Society of St. Pius X do not have the proper faculty to absolve, the Church supplied these faculties so that the sacrament was valid (cf. Code of Canon Law c.144).”
So what this means is that those unaware of this fact can have valid marriages. But those who are aware that these priest do not have valid faculties will not be married.
It is also true that those SSPX priest that do this have committed a grave sin.
If someone who had confessed in a SSPX chapel who is not aware of this can receive grace as supplied by the Church, but if he becomes aware of this he needs to confess these sins properly.
Jeff,
If the SSPX is in schism, THEN IT IS NOT PART OF the Catholic Church. Fine, so let’s go with this thread for argument’s sake. In fact, you have stated this above: “The Orthodox are not Catholics and thus do not come under juridical rule. Same as for any non-Catholic individuals.”
So by your OWN ADMISSION:
1) the SSPX IS NOT PART OF the Catholic Church, and thereby (“…non-Catholic individuals”),
2) the SSPX DOES NOT NEED jurisdiction from the Catholic Church; hence its marriages and confessions are automatically valid (“…Same as for any non-Catholic individuals”).
You obviously understand how this particular point of canon law works, so why do you apply a double-standard to:
-the schismatic Orthodox, and
-the “schismatic” SSPX?
If both entities are *equally schismatic*, then both have *equally valid marriages and confesions*; yes?
By the way, it is a point of canon law that you normally *do* need facilities (jurisdiction) to give the Last Rites. In an *extraordinary* situation however (e.g., no priest with faculties is available, etc.), the Church *provides* the jurisdiction herself so that the Catholic does not die with out the last sacrament.
Jeff,
Canon 1335 provides that where a latae sententiae censure has not been declared, the
prohibition on celebrating the sacraments is suspended whenever a member of the faithful
requests a sacrament or sacramental or an act of governance “for any just cause.” A desire to attend the Traditional Mass,is certainly a just cause. Sound, spiritual direction in the confessional for the welfare of one’s soul is
also a just cause. The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church.
The SSPX are not sinning by providing confession or marriages when they have a right to as Catholic priests under canon laws 1752, 144, 19, and 1335.
Ecclesiae Dei erred in their dealing with the SSPX. The Church has treated the SSPX unjustly and this faithful Catholic group will be vindicated in the coming years and decades. Archbishop Lefebvre will be raised to sainthood in my lifetime. They were right about the TLM and are right about the other things.
Through supplied jurisdiction and just cause associated with the supreme law of the salvation of souls, gives the SSPX priests sure validity of every sacrament whether or not the Catholic is informed or not.
Jesus has seen to the validity and protection of the SSPX.
Actually I never said anything about whether the SSPX is in schism.
But being Catholic and becoming schismatic does not remove you from Church law. Those who are actually schismatic still come under canon law. A formal act of defection from the Catholic Church requires more than just joining a schismatic or other group.
The Pontifical Council of Legislative Texts said that true actus formalis defcionis ab Ecclesia requires.
1. The internal decision to leave the Catholic Church.
2. The realization and external manifestation of this decision.
3 The reception of that decision by the competent ecclesiastical authority.
Now some Canon lawyers think their definition is way to strict, but let us just go with #1 which certainly would be a traditional understanding of a requirement for formal defection. Surely most members of the SSPX did not intend to leave the Catholic Church and most are not sedevacanists and believe in the pope’s authority to a large extent. This is obvious since many members of the SSPX argue that they are not in schism.
Now as to the difference between the Orthodox and SSPX. When a group goes into schism the Church considers those members formerly in schism. They do not consider future generations of members of this church to be responsible for schism. Otherwise pretty much all non-Catholics belonging to Protestant churches would be formally held to be in schism.
“The SSPX are not sinning by providing confession or marriages”
The Vatican has specifically ruled that confessions and marriages are invalid by the SSPX and only in the cases when the people receiving the sacrament are unaware of this does the Church provide jurisdiction.
How can performing a sacrament invalidly not be sinful? How can not being obedient to Church authority not be sinful? Are you telling me that SSPX priests are totally ignorant of what the Vatican has said on this? Why is it that they can just ignore this?
Jeff,
The Vatican has erred. The SSPX marriages and confessions are valid according to canon law and the suspension of the priests are unjust.
In the future the Church will admit its failings in this regard. Either Pope Benedict or a future Pope will make the ex-communications on the four bishops null and void. Pope John Paul II has erred by allowing everyone to believe the excommunications are valid and he has ignored the canonical defense of Archbishop Lefebvre.
Modernism has griped many clerics. In the future, after a restoration, the validity of all these sacraments will be made clear.
There will be many mea culpas over what has happened in these days of apostasy.
We are going to have to agree to disagree here.
Of course every group that goes off on their own says the “Vatican has erred.” I think I prefer to listen to the One Holy Catholic Church and not the SSPX. It is the Pope who is the highest legislator and no Canon lawyer has authority over him.
Regardless I am not going to reply any more on this thread since I don’t see the point. If you can just ignore what the Chuch has ruled than there is no way to argue.
Comments are closed.