No salvation in SSPX?

[jovan66102]

Also, feel free to request an Introduction to Tradition Kit while you're there.

I've tried, but it's available only to US residents as far as I can see. Both UnamSanctam and I are in Canada.

[Benno]

Hawaii-5-O, do you admit that there were some good and bad things about that period of history for Catholics? I'm thinking in terms of theology mainly. But maybe that belongs elsewhere.

There is definitely salvation both in and outside of the sspx, to stay on topic!

[Hawaii Five-0]

Hawaii-5-O, do you admit that there were some good and bad things about that period of history for Catholics? I'm thinking in terms of theology mainly. But maybe that belongs elsewhere.

There is definitely salvation both in and outside of the sspx, to stay on topic!

I don't know how to answer your question, it's a vague generalization that doesn't make much sense. 

As to your statement, the SSPX is a priestly fraternity that provides the sacraments to the faithful.  The only salvation they offer is the Catholic Faith and the sacraments of the Church.  The SSPX is part of the Church not the Church. Cardinal Ratzinger's nullification of Bishop Ferrario's unjust excommunication demonstrates that those who receive the sacraments from the priests of the SSPX or support them in their work are not in schism.  It's really that simple. 

[SouthpawLink]

Hawaii Five-0,
Prayers for your mother and friends. 

Vetus gave a great answer, and I would add that I've read we can attend Mass at an SSPX chapel out of love for the TLM (and a number of their marriages have been upheld by Rome, no?).

UnamSanctum,
Definitely check out the Articles Index and the Catholic FAQ sections at SSPX.org.  Down the line, if you want some history about what led to Vatican II, then check out the Si Si, No No articles (They Think They've Won! series) at sspxasia.com.

Hawaii-5-O, do you admit that there were some good and bad things about that period of history for Catholics? I'm thinking in terms of theology mainly. But maybe that belongs elsewhere.

There is definitely salvation both in and outside of the sspx, to stay on topic!

You mean the pre-conciliar period?  Yes, the neo-Scholasticism/Thomism was excellent while the neo-Modernism/nouvelle theologie/Ressourcement sucked.  ;)

[pilgrimtochrist]

1) How is the SSPX any different from protestant and 'orthodox' churches who declared themselves to be the true Church?

Because the SSPX doesn't declare themselves to be the true Church, they just claim adherence to the faith of their fathers.  If their fathers (i.e. pre-Vatican II Church) was Catholic, the SSPX are Catholic.

2) Is the SSPX a valid and licit Mass?

Valid - yes
Licit - that's a complicated question.  Ostensibly, no.  But they claim extraordinary jurisdiction because of the present crisis in the Church.  The entirety of the SSPX case rests on the jurisdiction question.  If they have no jurisdiction, not only are their absolutions invalid but every exercise of the Sacraments, every Mass, is a sacrilege and a grave sin.

3) Is the SSPX sedevacantist?

No, most sedevacantist groups have split off of the SSPX, others were formed in a different lineage (Thuc).  Some statements of Abp. Lefebvre seem ambiguous, however.

4) What is SSPX view of FSSP and other such extraordinary form orders

Traitors, turncoats, fake Traditionalists, "Tridentinists" (they only care about having a "pretty" Mass), Conciliarists, etc., etc.  There is still much bad blood more than 20 years after the split between the FSSP and SSPX.

5) Who is in charge (temporally and spiritually) of the SSPX?

Jesus Christ, Pope Benedict XVI, Bp. Fellay

6) What is SSPX view on Vatican II?

It contained positive error (not just a bad "interpretation" or an evil "Spirit of Vatican II")




NB: I am not SSPX, I attend an FSSP parish.

[Old Salt]

.  "If they have no jurisdiction, not only are their absolutions invalid but every exercise of the Sacraments, every Mass, is a sacrilege and a grave sin."
But according to Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos formerly of the P.C.E.D. one may assist at at an SSPX Mass done out of love and adherence to the TLM, and not out of a desire to seperate oneself from the Hol Father, "without commiting a sin and incurring any canonical penalty".

How could SSPX Mass be a sacrilege and a grave sin if the faithful commit no sin by assisting at it?

[spiritofjoy]

Also, feel free to request an Introduction to Tradition Kit while you're there.

I've tried, but it's available only to US residents as far as I can see. Both UnamSanctam and I are in Canada.

If that's the same thing as the New to Tradition Kit (http://www.sspx.org/apologetic_materials.htm), it's available from Angelus Press for $20 USD.

[pilgrimtochrist]

.  "If they have no jurisdiction, not only are their absolutions invalid but every exercise of the Sacraments, every Mass, is a sacrilege and a grave sin."
But according to Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos formerly of the P.C.E.D. one may assist at at an SSPX Mass done out of love and adherence to the TLM, and not out of a desire to seperate oneself from the Hol Father, "without commiting a sin and incurring any canonical penalty".

How could SSPX Mass be a sacrilege and a grave sin if the faithful commit no sin by assisting at it?

Hence Rome implicitly recognizes that the Society has extraordinary jurisdiction.

Or perhaps they are just denying the underlying principle.

[Benno]

Hawaii, what I wrote may be "vague" and "a generalization", but it makes sense. Do you have an opinion about good and bad things in that period of Catholic history?

[BlessedMotherPrayforUs]

Schism is a rupture of unity in the Church. When many think of schism, they think of the consecration of four bishops by Archbishop Lefebvre on June 30, 1988, done against the wishes of Rome. 
In 1988, the SSPX said there was no schism because the new bishops had no jurisdiction. Today, these bishops of the SSPX now claim to have jurisdiction, because they grant marriage annulments and impose censures on laypeople, and this requires jurisdiction. 
How could we know that the SSPX is now in schism due to the jurisdiction they have taken for themselves? It's not by asking Rome who opposed the consecrations of 1988, or by asking the SSPX. No-one will ever admit that they are in schism. So, how could we know?  Fortunately, there are books on canon law and schism which we can study to know whether the SSPX is in schism or not, based on the principle that if someone illegally takes on the jurisdiction belonging to the Pope, then they are in schism – it doesn't matter what the SSPX says otherwise.