I hate that this is getting so much media time, but I also really appreciate you guys taking the time to explain all the finer canonical details. It helps me to know if I'm thinking through things correctly, and it's a great resource to send people to for further info. So thanks!
If Rome can't even properly inflict canonical penalties on a clear cut and dry manner, this does not inspire hope or confidence in much of anything they are doing.
I think I’m lost in the weeds here…if being excommunicated means that you are not allowed to offer Mass and moving forward, priests deciding to stay within SSPX would incur a penalty of undeclared excommunication, how is it possible that “the SSPX liturgy fulfills, at least in principle, the Sunday obligation”?
Question for JD and/or Ed: I understand the idea behind the SSPX priests no longer being able to validly absolve under normal circumstances since that faculty is granted to priests through communion with their bishop. How does this affect the SSPX bishops, though? My limited understanding is that bishops possess the authority to absolve by virtue of being bishops. Is this a weird situation where one could validly, but illicitly, receive absolution from the bishops but not the priests?
I hate that this is getting so much media time, but I also really appreciate you guys taking the time to explain all the finer canonical details. It helps me to know if I'm thinking through things correctly, and it's a great resource to send people to for further info. So thanks!
This was a super helpful explainer! We read it out loud over dinner to answer all our questions.
I"m just gonna say it:
If Rome can't even properly inflict canonical penalties on a clear cut and dry manner, this does not inspire hope or confidence in much of anything they are doing.
I think I’m lost in the weeds here…if being excommunicated means that you are not allowed to offer Mass and moving forward, priests deciding to stay within SSPX would incur a penalty of undeclared excommunication, how is it possible that “the SSPX liturgy fulfills, at least in principle, the Sunday obligation”?
It's the difference between invalid and illicit. The SSPX aren't allowed to offer mass (illicit), but it's still a real (valid) mass if they do so.
Question for JD and/or Ed: I understand the idea behind the SSPX priests no longer being able to validly absolve under normal circumstances since that faculty is granted to priests through communion with their bishop. How does this affect the SSPX bishops, though? My limited understanding is that bishops possess the authority to absolve by virtue of being bishops. Is this a weird situation where one could validly, but illicitly, receive absolution from the bishops but not the priests?