Skip to main content

SSPX Masses and the Sunday Obligation by John Salza

In the span of just a few days, two well-known Catholics publicly gave what I maintain are erroneous conclusions regarding whether or not SSPX Masses fulfill the Sunday obligation. On September 18, 2024, in an interview with Gene Zannetti, Fr. Chad Ripperger stated that SSPX Masses fulfill the obligation. And on September 21, 2024, in an article by Daniel Payne for Catholic News Agency (about the Carmelite nuns who defected to the SSPX), Jimmy Akin of Catholic Answers is also quoted as suggesting that SSPX Masses fulfill the obligation (because he says Catholics can attend their Masses and receive Holy Communion).

As I will demonstrate in this article, both statements fall short of a proper understanding of canon law, which lead to the erroneous conclusion. Note that I already addressed this issue at length in my November 2021 article “Do SSPX Masses Fulfill the Sunday Obligation?” (this previous article also analyzes all the negative judgments by the Holy See regarding SSPX Mass attendance). However, because of the gravity of the issue concerning many souls, and the influence these two gentlemen have in Catholic circles, along with new errors that were made in their presentations, I believe another reply is warranted. 
...

Read the full article:
...

In my previous article, I go through the many negative judgments of the PCED (from 1984 to 2015) on assisting at SSPX Masses. Indeed, there is not a single reply or authentic interpretation of canon law which holds that SSPX Masses fulfill the ecclesiastical precept of canon 1248 (and that is because they do not satisfy the precept). In fact, the only PCED reply which directly addressed a dubium on whether “independent” chapel Masses (in this case, associated with the SSPX) satisfy canon 1248 concluded that such Masses do not fulfill the Sunday obligation under canon 1248 and which results in sin when such Masses are attended for Sundays and Holy Days (Msgr. Pozzo, March 28, 2012).


It appears that Fr. Ripperger and Mr. Akin do not understand the gravity of their position on the SSPX. For example, in his interview, Fr. Ripperger flippantly stated: “If I were Pope, the first thing I would do is call the head of the SSPX and say, you are to be at my office at 8.00 in the morning, and what I would do is, when he showed up, I would write it out myself, ‘you are canonically regularized!,’ here, go home, and we will figure out the rest later.”[24]


However, both Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI have offered the SSPX to be “canonically regularized,” on the condition that they accept certain basic doctrinal principles and renounce certain errors, and the SSPX has refused. Evidently, it does not matter to Fr. Ripperger that the SSPX, inter alia, rejects the Catholic Church’s Profession of Faith (required by all who hold office in the Church); that it calls Vatican II’s teaching on collegiality a “heresy”; that it calls the Novus Ordo Mass “intrinsically evil”; that it claims to have the Four Marks and the privileges of the ordinary and universal Magisterium, while claiming the “conciliar Church” has defected; that it promotes all kinds of errors and heresies on jurisdiction, mission, sacramental intention, among other things; and that it runs its own “ecclesiastical” tribunal which grants marriage annulments, dispensation from vows and the lifting of censures (and requires its adherents to swear on the gospels that they will not approach a legitimate tribunal but will abide by their judgments), all against the authority of the local ordinaries and the Holy See. For Fr. Ripperger, the SSPX should be “canonically regularized” by the Pope immediately, without regard to the foregoing, which is none other than its habitual separation from the Pope, his Magisterium and Catholic tradition. We live in confusing times indeed.

The heresies of the early Church related primarily to Christology (the nature of Christ). But the errors and heresies of our day relate almost exclusively to ecclesiology (the nature of the Church). Indeed, a failure to understand what the Church is (specifically, in her divine, juridical constitution) leads to many dangerous errors, such as who is and is not a member of the Church, who has jurisdiction in the Church, how jurisdiction is lost in the Church, and even what Masses satisfy the Church’s ecclesiastical precepts. These errors are promoted not only by those who have formally separated from the Church, like the Sedevacantists, but also unwittingly by mainstream apologists who don’t even attend SSPX chapels. This poses a grave spiritual harm, because it leads many souls outside the Catholic Church, the only ark of salvation.

Like the Sedevacantists, the Old Catholics, the “Dominicans” of Avrille, the Resistance and other independent groups of acephalous clergy, the SSPX bishops and priests are not part of the universal Catholic Church on Earth. That is why the Church considers those who attend Mass at a Society chapel to not be in full communion with the Catholic Church. In fact, in fidelity to their founder, SSPX bishops and priests proudly admit that they are not part of what they call the “conciliar Church” of Rome – which is none other than the Roman Catholic Church.

The Society admits it is not legally united to any particular Church or diocese, and thus does not operate within any of the 24 Particular churches or six Rites of the universal Church. The Society also does not have bishops with ordinary jurisdiction and thus is not juridically united to the Pope and College of Bishops. In fact, the Society is not only not part of the universal Church, but readily admits that it operates contrary to the will of the universal Church, that is, the Pope and College of Bishops. Fr. Jonathan Loop of the SSPX recently summarized it perfectly when he said the Society operates “contrary to the known intentions, the known will of those successors of the Apostles, the Princes of the Church.”[25]
This means SSPX Masses are not “observed in the universal Church” and not “celebrated in a Catholic rite” as required by canon law. Therefore, SSPX Masses do not fulfill the Sunday obligation.

-John Salza, OP, JD

Read the rest:

Popular posts from this blog

"At this time, they (SSPX) are not part of the one Roman Catholic Church throughout the world" - Cardinal Raymond Burke

Bookmarked here at timestamp 9:21:  https://youtu.be/0TyjRoKUi2w?t=561

Lefebvrist: "The SSPX is not in schism!"

Lefebvrist: "The SSPX is not in schism!" CIC: "....schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him." (Canon 751) - - - - - -   Marcel Lefebvre: “We refuse on the other hand, and have always refused, to follow the Rome of Neo-Modernist and Neo-Protestant tendencies which became clearly manifest during the Second Vatican Council, and after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.” (Declaration, November 21, 1974) “We believe that we can affirm, taking into consideration the internal and external critique on Vatican II, that is, in analysing the texts and in studying its circumstances and its consequences, that the Council, turning its back on Tradition and breaking with the Church of the past, is a schismatic council. The tree is known by its fruits. Since the Council, all the larger newspapers throughout the world, American and European, recognise that it is destroying t...