Fr. Fitzpatrick vs. Fr. Scott on Validity of SSPX Confessions

[JMartyr]

The commentary on canon 144 says when a public circumstance would make a reasonable person conclude a priest has faculties, the Church supplies the faculties.Seeing a priest enter the confessional seems like such a circumstance.

[glgas]

Since you have in the past quoted the Ecclesia Dei commission, I would suggest going to http://www.olfatima.com/thisone.htm and click on communications with the Ecclessis Dei commission.  Read about the talks between the bishop and the commission. They  never say his explanation of canon 1335 was wrong or that the SSPX have invalid confessions.

Unfortunately the cut and paste does not works, but Cardinal meter is clear: one should have grave duty to remain united with the Vicar of Christ, and the confessor has the authority to requite one to desist from attending the Mass celebrated by suspended priest.

http://www.olfatima.com/ecclesiadei.htm

[JMartyr]

Since you have in the past quoted the Ecclesia Dei commission, I would suggest going to http://www.olfatima.com/thisone.htm and click on communications with the Ecclessis Dei commission.  Read about the talks between the bishop and the commission. They  never say his explanation of canon 1335 was wrong or that the SSPX have invalid confessions.

Unfortunately the cut and paste does not works, but Cardinal meter is clear: one should have grave duty to remain united with the Vicar of Christ, and the confessor has the authority to requite one to desist from attending the Mass celebrated by suspended priest.

http://www.olfatima.com/ecclesiadei.htm

From the outside looking in, I would agree that we should not go to suspended priests. But reading the history of Marcel Lefebvre and the Society , it is the Society and not the hierarchy that are defending the rights of Christ the King. In my opinion, a hundred years ago  many members of the the hierarchy would be the ones who are suspended or worse.

[JMartyr]

Since you have in the past quoted the Ecclesia Dei commission, I would suggest going to http://www.olfatima.com/thisone.htm and click on communications with the Ecclessis Dei commission.  Read about the talks between the bishop and the commission. They  never say his explanation of canon 1335 was wrong or that the SSPX have invalid confessions.

Unfortunately the cut and paste does not works, but Cardinal meter is clear: one should have grave duty to remain united with the Vicar of Christ, and the confessor has the authority to requite one to desist from attending the Mass celebrated by suspended priest.

http://www.olfatima.com/ecclesiadei.htm

Maybe I should go to the new mass down the road where ,acording to a relative that goes there,  the priest in confession spoke of the congregation as being necessary to have a 'eucharist ' or maybe  the approved latin mass 50 miles further than the SSPX chapel where the priest that says the TLM gives communion in the hand at the NO which according to St. Thomas is a sacrilege . I  love this priest as a father and yet realize he is in a position where he has to compromise the Faith.    :(

[glgas]

Maybe I should go to the new mass down the road where ,acording to a relative that goes there,  the priest in confession spoke of the congregation as being necessary to have a 'eucharist ' or maybe  the approved latin mass 50 miles further than the SSPX chapel where the priest that says the TLM gives communion in the hand at the NO which according to St. Thomas is a sacrilege . I  love this priest as a father and yet realize he is in a position where he has to compromise the Faith.    :(

You must do the same thing what the Ecclesia Dei expected for the SSPX: stop criticizing the Pope, the Council and the Church.

If you like the TLM attend TLM (at a church with full, not suspended, communion with the Pope), but stand to your values, and do not try to define yourself by negatives.

[Joseph11]

One man opened the door to a small room with two chairs and offered to give me an update on what is a sin but I quite bluntly don't trust anyone in flip-flops who proposes to instruct me in anything.

Good one! Priceless! Thanks.

Yeah, that was a really good post.  I loved it.

--------------------------------

Blue jeans, t-shirt with "Need a Friend?" on the back, and tennis shoes:

"I don't tell people what is and isn't a sin.  I let them tell me what they think is a sin or not."  (paraphrase)

I had reason to believe he was a priest since he regularly said Mass at that parish and was manifesting a preparedness to hear my yet to ensue confession.  But he wasn't like the priests I had been taught about from the Baltimore Catechism...................

How do I REALLY know whether some of these people are actually ordained?

[JMartyr]

Maybe I should go to the new mass down the road where ,acording to a relative that goes there,  the priest in confession spoke of the congregation as being necessary to have a 'eucharist ' or maybe  the approved latin mass 50 miles further than the SSPX chapel where the priest that says the TLM gives communion in the hand at the NO which according to St. Thomas is a sacrilege . I  love this priest as a father and yet realize he is in a position where he has to compromise the Faith.    :(

You must do the same thing what the Ecclesia Dei expected for the SSPX: stop criticizing the Pope, the Council and the Church.

If you like the TLM attend TLM (at a church with full, not suspended, communion with the Pope), but stand to your values, and do not try to define yourself by negatives.

Galatians chapter 2 : verses11-14       I expect a straight answer from Ecclesia Dei. The SSPX are in schism..... now they are not.

[JMartyr]

Here's a letter from the Pope to the Catholics in China. Read  section 10 : paragraph 6. The section is about Bishops who did not get the proper permission to consecrate other Bishops and priestly ordinations.  Sound familiar? Read what the POPE says about the validity of their sacraments.I guess when the SSPX was "out of communion with the Pope", their sacraments were valid after all!!!!!!!      http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070527_china_en.html         

[JMartyr]

I know someone will say since they were out of communion with Rome, then canon 844 applies since they were schismatic. So now that they are "with Rome", their sacraments are all of a sudden invalid?          844 wouldn't apply because the Pope said their ministry is illegitimate. This is my opinion. No canon lawyer or anything. I just recognize the SSPX situation is similar except the Archbishop did not want to seperate from Rome. How can SSPX get the proper jurisdiction from bishops  who will most likely be hostile towards them?

[glgas]

Galatians chapter 2 : verses11-14       I expect a straight answer from Ecclesia Dei. The SSPX are in schism..... now they are not.

Did you discussed your issues with the pope, like Paul did? Did he consent with you, like Peter did in that time.

The SSPX is discussing their issues with Rome, thus far no consent