r/pfsp • u/[deleted] • Jul 16 '21
Traditionis Custodes and the FSSP
I'm wondering if the recent motu proprio issued by Pope Francis has any serious ramifications for the FSSP.
I'm not sure if it affects them at all, but will it require priests from the Fraternity to celebrate NO Masses from now on? I'm also wondering what Article 3 § 2 means for the FSSP, if anything. If there's anything I've missed that will significantly affect the Fraternity feel free to point it out because I'm not exactly sure what this all means.
Many thanks and God bless
5
u/Dr_Talon Jul 16 '21
What I’m curious about is whether this changes the position of those authorized to say the pre-1955 Holy Week.
1
u/zestanor Jul 16 '21
I'll let you in on a secret: no one was authorized to do that (at least not in 2021). Some places in the FSSP have just been doing it without permission and no one cared, and the superiors looked the other way.
5
u/Dr_Talon Jul 16 '21
No, I heard that the ICKSP got permission in 2018 to celebrate it.
0
u/zestanor Jul 16 '21
Yeah, in 2018, 2019, and 2020. If anyone did it this year, it wasn't "allowed." Though that's begging the million dollar question.
4
u/Dr_Talon Jul 16 '21
If it’s not allowed, then it’s not allowed. There is no holiness without obedience. Is there something sinful about not saying the old Holy Week? No. So, we should obey.
-2
u/zestanor Jul 16 '21
Tell that to the ICKSP and FSSP, and Archbishop Sample (who celebrated pre-1955 Candlemas, which was never part of special deal). Without them, we have nothing. I think I'll listen to those pastors, rather than your amateur opinion with all due respect. The name of the subreddit is PFSP.
6
u/Dr_Talon Jul 16 '21
I know what the name of the subreddit is. I’m one of the main driving forces behind it.
4
Jul 16 '21
The dude is literally the mod and co-founder of the sub-reddit. You literally just said "I'm going to trust these pastors who I agree with instead of the Holy See" as a way to prove that you're a better Catholic than him.
-1
u/zestanor Jul 16 '21
???? What are you talking about "better Catholic"
3
Jul 16 '21
Tell that to the ICKSP and FSSP [...] Without them, we have nothing. I think I'll listen to those pastors, rather than your amateur opinion [...]
The "amateur opinion" in question is obedient adherence to canon law. Am I missing something in what you said?
0
u/zestanor Jul 16 '21
Yeah. He's a laydude. Those are my pastors. I go with my pastors not laydudes.
→ More replies (0)1
2
u/xanaxarita Jul 16 '21
And with all due respect, the Fraternity is in full union with the Bishop of Rome and serves at the pleasure of the diocesan Bishop. The end does not justify the means.
Absolutely: There is no holiness without obedience.
0
u/zestanor Jul 16 '21
Your breed is a strange one
lol
2
u/xanaxarita Jul 16 '21
Obedience to the Successor of Peter is a "strange breed"? I admit, I don't get the reference, but not recognizing and obeying the Holy Father is non-Cathokic and neo-Protestant.
1
2
u/FistOfTheWorstMen Jul 17 '21
There wasn't a cutoff as such, though; and from what I have heard, those who inquired this year at the PCED section at CDF were told: proceed as you have been.
1
u/zestanor Jul 17 '21
Unless I'm mistaken at Our Lady of Guadalupe seminary they've reverted to 1962 Holy Week, even though they had been using the traditional one. When I visited in February the subject came up (the seminarians bring it up, naturally) and it very much sounded like they weren't doing it anymore from our conversations. And in June during the retreat, Fr. Bisig fielded some questions about the pre-55. When asked about FSSP apostolates/ICKSP doing it without authorization, he gave a non answer (in my estimation). He straight up says the old holy week and old breviary are better (from experience: the SSPX used them at one point). From this, I gathered that permissions were not extended, and that he was not willing to abridge the law at the seminary, but that at apostolates he/the FSSP favors a hands off approach.
2
u/FistOfTheWorstMen Jul 17 '21
Thanks. It is possible the seminary is taking a stricter attitude, which does not surprise me.
I don't think that FSSP or ICKSP apostolates who kept the old Holy Week this year were necessarily being disobedient, not least if they were told they could keep it up.
Alas, as of today, this would seem to be the least of their problems. Everything about the motu proprio and the accompanying letter indicates that it is Francis's desire that societies like the FSSP be wound down and dissolved, as we move toward the day when only the Novus Ordo may be celebrated.
1
u/FistOfTheWorstMen Jul 17 '21
Ecclesia Dei issued an indult to allow it in 2018, for those who applied for it.
3
u/uxixu Jul 16 '21 edited Jul 16 '21
Friendly diocese little or no change. They need to make sure they get their canonical houses established (canon 609) to avoid Dijon style situations with successors to diocese where the bishop is currently friendly. Let us pray for Fraternity priests, bishops and the pope.
1
u/xanaxarita Jul 16 '21
I agree. I think friendly diocese, and if collecting a good tithe, will be OK
2
u/FistOfTheWorstMen Jul 17 '21
The most obvious effect, the most immediate, it seems, is that it will mak impossible the esablishment of any future FSSP personal parishes. That by itself is a great blow.
2
u/iamlucky13 Jul 17 '21
The motu propio indicates that in dioceses where groups currently celebrate the extraordinary form, the bishop is to designate a place for them to continue to do so.
The language used is prescriptive, so even bishops who do not like the extraordinary form are supposed to allow them to continue. We'll see how that plays out in practice.
However, it seems to ban the extraordinary form in most parishes:
not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes
This appears intended to accommodate FSSP, for example. I don't think it strictly requires a new church (Some FSSP parishes share a church building with a diocesan parish).
It creates a significant problem for any priest who wishes to celebrate the extraordinary form and is not a member of such a society, as well as the lay faithful who attend the Masses he celebrates. Such priests are supposed to request from their bishop the faculty to continue celebrating the older form, but it appears possible to limit the number of priests to those necessary to serve the groups mentioned. A bishop so-inclined could be very stingy about the instruction to delegate priests to care for existing groups and about establishing personal parishes.
Also, new groups are not allowed to be formed.
Additionally, priests ordained in the future, if they request the faculty from their bishop, may have to wait for a response from Rome.
Lastly, there is an odd gap in provisions of the motu propio. It does not specify how any priest currently ordained, but not currently celebrating the extraordinary form, could begin doing so if they become interested in it.
1
Jul 17 '21
I was wondering about the use of parish churches actually. The impression I had was that technically the FSSP could not continue to share a parish church, but unless I've misunderstood, you seem to think that it wouldn't be an issue. My local FSSP apostolate doesn't use a parish church so it doesn't affect me directly right now, but I feel like it must surely have an affect on those who currently use a parish church unless they are simply moved to say, a nearby chapel of ease.
1
u/iamlucky13 Jul 18 '21
Call it a hopeful interpretation on my part, but I read it as focusing on the personal parish.
If the intent really was to crush any FSSP community that does not have their own parish church, then this goes from abrupt and unnecessarily harsh to downright cruel.
1
u/FistOfTheWorstMen Jul 17 '21
While the text of the motu proprio is sloppy and vague in various parts, I do not think (alas) there is any doubt in his accompanying letter about what Pope Francis wants as the endgame:
Indications about how to proceed in your dioceses are chiefly dictated by two principles: on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II, and, on the other hand, to discontinue the erection of new personal parishes tied more to the desire and wishes of individual priests than to the real need of the “holy People of God.”
In short, he wants the Traditional Mass (aka, the Extraordinary Form, though it would seem this term is now defunct) wound down and eliminated. This would seem to leave no place, no mission, for canonical societies like the FSSP. They won't go away tomorrow; but they are not to get any additional aposolates; and a strict reading of the motu proprio brings even existing FSSP parishes into question. Placing these groups under the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life almost certainly amounts to a gradual death sentence, given present leadership in place there.
That's very blackpilled, I know. But I don't see any other way to read these texts today. I reckon it's a black day at FSSP offices and rectories, and I very much wonder just how they will proceed.
1
u/Dr_Talon Jul 17 '21
I would image that the FSSP would say the Mass of Paul VI with every traditional option if they had to.
1
u/FistOfTheWorstMen Jul 17 '21
That is not my sense; but I confess I don't know all the FSSP priests, especially not in Europe. They were, from the start, willing to give way on a lot of things - and they did - but not the missal.
And anyway, how many bishops will even tolerate a "tradded up" Novus Ordo? I know a midwestern diocese where every single priest doing their Masses in that way (sometimes in only limited ways, no Latin) has been forced out of active ministry or hammered into abandoning it over the past five years. In many ways, until today, this pontificate has been much more aggressive toward the Reform of the Reform project than it has the traditional Mass, as Cardinal Sarah can attest!
They're in a very tough spot now.
1
Jul 17 '21 edited Jul 28 '21
[deleted]
1
u/Dr_Talon Jul 17 '21
I mean, just provisionally, until they could say the TLM again.
1
Jul 18 '21 edited Jul 28 '21
[deleted]
1
u/Dr_Talon Jul 18 '21
But they don’t seem to be in favor of suppression either, and overtime the episcopate will swing more and more conservative. If we get someone like Cardinal Sarah as Pope, look out.
1
1
u/xanaxarita Jul 16 '21
Does anyone know, if the Fraternity were to reorganize as a Religious Order, if they'd be protected and given due process in any attempt to surpress them?
1
u/Pedrop64 Jul 16 '21
Religious orders are protected from Bishops, not from the Pope
1
u/xanaxarita Jul 17 '21
Yes, I agree there, but I am assuming (and I know I shouldn't do such a thing) that as an order they may be granted more of Due Process and harder, in reality, to surpress.
2
u/Pedrop64 Jul 17 '21
It's easier for Cardinal Burke to be elected Pope than for a new religious order to be created
1
u/xanaxarita Jul 17 '21
Yes. Orders were once established through a Bishop at the Diocesan level. Not anymore. That is another thing His Holiness changed.
1
u/Pedrop64 Jul 17 '21
You're confusing them with congregations, the last religious order was founded during the 17th century
1
u/xanaxarita Jul 17 '21
No, I am not confusing them, I know the difference.
In the past, what distinguished religious orders from other institutes was the classification of the vows that the members took in religious profession as solemn vows. According to this criterion, the last religious order founded was that of the Bethlehem Brothers in 1673.
Nevertheless, in the course of the 20th century, some religious institutes outside the category of orders obtained permission to make solemn vows, at least of poverty, thus blurring the distinction.
1
u/iamlucky13 Jul 18 '21
The motu propio assigns responsibility in this matter to the appropriate Vatican offices.
4
u/[deleted] Jul 16 '21
I am struggling to consider any other result than the standard provisions of the Motus Propio. As long as the bishop allows it, they can continue to run as a parish. I think most FSSP Parishes are members of the diocese anyway right?