Skip to main content

A case against association with the SSPX and attending their Masses


I think traditionalist-minded folks can get bogged down with the technicalities of the Msgr Perl letters, and there are several of them, because of nuances related to fulfilling the Sunday obligation and other particular issues.

My approach to this issue is simply this:

1. Canon law defines what "schism" is: "Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him." (CIC, 751).

2. Schism is incurred "latae sententiae", that is to say, automatically by the very act of schism, without a need for declaration from the ecclesiastical authority: "An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication" (CIC, 1364).

3. The SSPX, in various ways, in currently available printed books, pamphlets, tracts, articles, blogs, websites, maintains or promotes the historical teaching and statements of Msgr. Marcel Lefevbre, indicating that the SSPX cannot be in communion with "modernist Rome".

It is clear that with all those who leave us or who have left us for Sedevacantism or with those who want to be subject to the current hierarchy of the Church while hoping to keep the Tradition, we can no longer have relations with them. It is not possible. We say that one cannot be subject to ecclesiastical authority and keep Tradition. They claim the opposite. This is to deceive the faithful. (…) we want to be absolutely free from compromise both with regard to Sedevacantists and with regard to those who want to be subject to ecclesiastical authority. -Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Conference in Flavigny, December 1988, Fideliter n° 68, p. 16.

For more evidence of the teaching of Lefevbre: Look here, here, here, here, and here

4. Therefore, the SSPX, at least in particular cases, that can be easily verifiable by asking their priestly membership, or followers, 1) if they submit to the Supreme Pontiff or 2) accept communion with the members in union with the Supreme Pontiff, or 3) affirm or reject the various schismatical teachings of Msgr. Lefebvre on the SSPX relationship with the Roman authorities can be shown to meet the definition of "schism" (CIC 751) and incur such a penalty automatically without ecclesiastical declaration (CIC 1364).

5. Msgr. Perl writes that the Pont. Commission Ecclesia Dei discourages attendance at the SSPX, and that while attendance itself is not a "formal schism", one might adopt the "schismatic mentality", which would then incur the penalty of schism. 

While it is true that participation in the Mass at the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself constitute "formal adherence to the schism", such adherence can come about over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a schismatic mentality which separates itself from the teaching of the Supreme Pontiff and the entire Catholic Church classically exemplified in A Rome and Econe Handbook which states in response to question 14 that the SSPX defends the traditional catechisms and therefore the Old Mass, and so attacks the Novus Ordo, the Second Vatican Council and the New Catechism, all of which more or less undermine our unchangeable Catholic faith. It is precisely because of this schismatic mentality that this Pontifical Commission has consistently discouraged the faithful from attending Masses celebrated under the aegis of the Society of St. Pius X.

In summary:

  • Canon law defines schism (Can. 751). 
  • The SSPX priests and their followers can be shown to hold a "schismatic mentality", 
  • This meets the criteria for schism.
  • It is incurred automatically (Can. 1364). 
  • Therefore, it is not advisable to attend the SSPX chapels or socialize among their communities.
For more information:

Popular posts from this blog

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 SS...
Read more

"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
Read more

Schismatics, the SSPX, and Sedes w/ John Salza (Pints with Aquinas)

Schismatics, the SSPX, and Sedes w/ John Salza   Didn’t Francis give the SSPX faculties for confession? SSPX priests name Francis in the Mass State of Necessity Canon 1323 and Archb. Lefebvre Lifting of the Excommunications Fulton Sheen and the SSPX Novus Ordo Priest discouraging going to FSSP in schism? Isn’t the Novus Ordo an offense to God? No TLM without SSPX and Lefebvre Wasn’t Rome toying with Lefebvre and so his actions were necessary Are you saying not to go to TLM and go to a clown Mass? The marriage issue in the SSPX and the schismatic tribunal erected by the SSPX Canon law, in brief Is Francis the true pope? Universal and peaceful acceptance Formal, Material, Occult Heresy and Schism The Benevacantist arguments Great Western Schism, confusion in good faith Francis, a bad pope Covid and Trads leaving to join schismatic and heretical groups, sedevacantists Mainstream Trads calling people “enemies of the Church” Heretical post-conciliar popes St. Robert Bellarmine JP II ...
Read more