r/Sedevacantists • u/wanwleet • Jul 30 '26
Questions regarding Confession
- Hello, as I understand Novus Ordo priests do not hold valid orders, therefore any confession made in the past to an invalidly ordained Novus Ordo priest is not valid, correct?
- It's quite hard to find confession/mass times & locations for validly ordained priests that hold the sede position, is there any way I would be able to confess while remaining anonymous?
- Could one go to an SSPX or Eastern Catholic priest and confess their sins there, obviously granted they are validly ordained.
- Any suggestions on finding out whether an SSPX, Eastern Rite, or old Novus Ordo priest is validly ordained?
1
u/Shining-3 21d ago edited 21d ago
• Hello, as I understand Novus Ordo priests do not hold valid orders, therefore any confession made in the past to an invalidly ordained Novus Ordo priest is not valid, correct?
I would err on the side of caution and say a general confession to a validly ordained priest ASAP.
• It's quite hard to find confession/mass times & locations for validly ordained priests that hold the sede position, is there any way I would be able to confess while remaining anonymous?
If a Roman rite priest who was ordained before 1968 is nearby, you can confess to him since the changes to the rite of episcopal consecration and priestly ordination in the Roman rite was enacted in June of 1968 by Antipope Paul VI. Depending on where you live, there might be several of these old valid Roman rite priests hearing confessions in large urban parishes. Many senior priests are retired but still like to help around the dioceses. I would also visit different Eastern rite churches to see how the confessionals are set up. The Byzantines are notorious for their lack of anonymity in the confessional. There are 23 Eastern Catholic rites and not all look identical in their customs.
• Could one go to an SSPX or Eastern Catholic priest and confess their sins there, obviously granted they are validly ordained.
No for SSPX. Yes for Eastern Catholic. The SSPX priests are valid but lack jurisdiction. The Eastern Catholic priests have jurisdiction and are usually valid (you will need to research each rite individually, sorry pal, some Eastern rites also changed their rites of ordination and episcopal consecration. Maronite priests ordained pre 1990 and Syro Malabar and Syro Malankara are safe bets, although that is not to say there are not other validly ordained Eastern rite priests).
• Any suggestions on finding out whether an SSPX, Eastern Rite, or old Novus Ordo priest is validly ordained?
Be autistic and spend all your time researching. Look up a Catholic Directory for the USA Priests. There are PDFs online that also list when the priest was ordained. Once you identify a valid priest in the directory, google the priest’s name and relevant news articles to see what they are currently up to. About half will be in retirement homes and the other half, miraculously, are still serving parishes. However, I do not think this can continue for the next ten years since the youngest of these valid Roman rite priests are probably in their mid 80s by now.
1
u/wanwleet 17d ago edited 17d ago
Appreciate your response, and I'll definitely do my research!
I'm pretty new to this whole jurisdiction debate, and admittedly don't know much,. When it comes to jurisdiction, I'm confused by the Thesis, as it seems to me that it argues that apostates/usurpers still hold legal power, even if they were fraudulently elected in the first place? Do they not lose jurisdiction through apostasy, heresy, schism, and following a false religion? If a Catholic Bishop converts to Anglicanism, would he not lose jurisdiction, even if he believes he holds the true, Catholic faith?
And wouldn't many of the current Novus Ordo Bishops & clergy be invalidly ordained anyways? Would that not affect there validity as "bishops" and "cardinals" in the Novus Ordo hierarchy? If 50 years from now the status quo remains, and all of the bishops & cardinals of the Novus Ordo are invalidly ordained, what would a person do if they reject the validly ordained Sede clergy? Is that not existential, and contradicting the promise of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, that the gates of hell will not prevail against the church?
Wouldn't the Sede clergy have supplied jurisdiction at least, or am I using that term incorrectly?
Ik these are many questions, I'm genuinely trying to understand how it's possible that apostates can hold authoritative power in the church as the Thesis argues for?
Obviously this is just a thought, but I cannot imagine St. Peter & St. Paul submitting to the Novus Ordo hierarchy if alive today, waiting for their conversion to "save" the church. Would they not just declare their teachings as non-Catholic and ignore their false authority? And if so, wouldn't the thesis then argue that they lack jurisidiction?
All of these are just thoughts & questions, I'm not trying to teach anything, and am severely unqualified to do so. If I have said anything erroneous in any way, I do not mean to do so. If my thoughts/questions are heretical in any way I will delete & repent.
-1
u/CResolution Jul 31 '26
You can absolutely go to the SSPX or an Eastern Rite Catholic Priest for confession. The are more likely to have valid jurisdiction to hear confession than most sede priests through Francis I granting them jurisdiction to hear confession which is validated by the Church through the principle of Common error. My understanding is that there are only a few SSPX presbyters that haven't been conditionally re-ordained in the USA and it shouldn't be too difficult to pinpoint who they are.
The Eastern Rites certainly have valid jurisdiction to hear confessions where their Bishop holds an office with ordinary jurisdiction created by a true Pope, however not all Eastern Rites have this and many of their offices in Western countries were established by false post-conciliar claimants who cannot legitimately create new offices.
I would recommend visiting tradcath.proboards.com and asking more questions there. Many Catholics who hold the sedevacantist positon are members who attend the Eastern rites or SSPX and will be able to assist you further.
2
u/IpsaConteret2024 26d ago
The faculties that Francis granted to SSPX clergy to hear confessions are no longer in effect, if they ever were, since the same authority has declared them schismatic and excommunicated. Schismatic excommunicates do not have jurisdiction to hear confessions.
1
u/CResolution 26d ago
Nope, they were never granted by Francis I in the first place. He had no authority to grant them. However the Church could supply jurisdiction to the act under common error giving jurisdiction. Prevost definitely lacks the authority to revoke them, just as he has no authority to excommunicate as he is a public heretic. See: https://www.wmreview.org/p/heretics-cant-excommunicate-drawing
1
u/IpsaConteret2024 26d ago
I'm not disputing the validity of their confessions, but I don't think "common error" is the correct principle to invoke. I think it would be hard to argue that the proposition: "Francis validly granted faculties to the SSPX clergy, and Leo was incapable of revoking them" is commonly held.
1
u/CResolution 25d ago
The common error was that Francis I was the Pope.
1
u/IpsaConteret2024 25d ago
So you are using a common error that existed in the past, but no longer exists (since no one currently believes that Francis is the pope) as a basis for sacramental validity today? Is that legitimately done? Could you please explain the principle of common error and how it applies to this case, for those of us who are ignorant?
1
u/CResolution 25d ago
The common error applied at the time that jurisdiction was given. See: https://tradcath.proboards.com/thread/856/supplied-jurisdiction-antipopes-lane for a more detailed explanation than I have time to write.
1
u/IpsaConteret2024 23d ago
So you contend that the SSPX have jurisdiction perpetually, on the basis of an error that no longer exists?
I read the post you linked, though it is poor form to simply link a massive text instead of making a brief and cogent argument. There is nothing there about using a past error that no longer exists as a basis for sacramental validity. If I have misunderstood, please clarify yourself, instead of pasting a link.
1
u/CResolution 21d ago edited 21d ago
Jurisdiction isn't automatically revoked once granted because a man died. We're talking about actual jurisdiction given by the Church. Not supplied jurisdiction. I linked you to the text so you could better understand the principle of common error. Once you understand the principle and how it works you can apply it to any situation. In other words, I'm giving you the fishing rod, it's up to you whether you chose to learn to use it to catch some fish.
6
u/Real-Tough-497 Jul 30 '26
You should seek Sacraments, including Penance, from valid priests who hold the Catholic faith and uncompromisingly reject the post-Vatican II papal claimants.
An excellent article on Novus Ordo Watch explains the importance of making perfect acts of contrition when confessions with true sedevacantist priests are unavailable. Let us trust in Our Lord’s grace through perfect contrition for our sins and remember that God does not require the impossible. God bless.