Would love to discuss.
I am not, but you might want to reach out to Kennedy Hall on Twitter. He is Canadian, but I believe he wrote a book about the SSPX and belongs to a Parish that is SSPX. Hope this helps : )
Thanks. Sounds like he is committed.
I don’t know what SSPX is, so I used Google Gemini for some help. Here’s what it shows:
The SSPX stands for the **Society of Saint Pius X (**Latin: Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X). It is an international traditionalist Catholic priestly fraternity.
Origin and Purpose
The society was founded in 1970 by French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. It was formed in direct reaction to the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II), which took place in the 1962–1965.
The SSPX rejects many of Vatican II’s modernizing reforms, advocating instead for a return to pre-conciliar Catholic traditions. Most notably, they:
- Exclusively celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass (Tridentine Mass) and reject the modern Novus Ordo Mass.
- Oppose Vatican II doctrines regarding ecumenism (dialogue with other religions) and religious liberty.
Relationship with the Vatican
The SSPX occupies a highly complex, “canonically irregular” status within the Roman Catholic Church. While they explicitly recognize the Pope as the legitimate head of the Church, they operate independently of mainstream diocesan structures.
The 1988 Schism: The biggest rift occurred when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four new bishops without a papal mandate. Pope John Paul II declared this a schismatic act, and those involved were automatically excommunicated .
Lifting the Excommunications: In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications in an attempt to foster reconciliation, though he noted the society still lacked official canonical status.
Sacramental Concessions: Pope Francis later granted SSPX priests the formal authority to validly hear confessions and witness marriages.
Current Tensions: The relationship remains strained. The Vatican continues to warn the SSPX against ordaining new bishops without papal approval, which carries the threat of renewed excommunications.
The SSPX has around several hundred thousand to a million lay adherents worldwide, with strong bases of operation in France, the United States (particularly Kansas), and Argentina.
A parish in northeast Florida which I formerly belonged to offered both the Latin Mass (once a month) and Novus Ordo (the modern Mass). I have a copy of the Latin translation of the Latin Mass into English so that one could learn/follow it during the Latin Mass. However, the diocese Bishop pre-approved our parish to offer the Latin Mass once per month.
I personally see reason and applicability of the Latin Mass. It’s a universal language with very little differences varying from culture to culture or countries (for example the Latin Mass in the United States vs. one in China). But the differences from these two Masses are those of Rites and doctrinal opposition which are currently in question.
However, any sect which is in division or separation from the Vatican-II I can’t support. And SSPX is in division and/or separation from the Church beginning with Vatican II.
1 Like
Another note. I also searched MAGISTERIUM AI for SSPX and in it’s results show a much clearer and detailed explanation than that of Google Gemini (which I posted above). This explanation from MAGISTERIUM AI, I recommend using because it explains how we as Catholics today should be aware of and take precautions of SSPX.
https://www.magisterium.com/search/499e49a4-bdf0-4ede-b4cf-64cf05819023
I hope you find this helpful, as I did. +
I’m not an adherent of the SSPX, but I do find the Traditional Latin Mass possible the most effective way to connect with God. I leave a TLM feeling like I have drunk deeply of the living water of God after being in the desert of the NO. When Pope Francis decided to change the rules on the TLM our Bishop forbade any TLM in our diocese. There used to be a lot. Now there are none withing 2 hours of us. Apart from the SSPX. So I have been there quite often. I am not fully in agreement with them. I find it a little bit like going back in time to the 1950s, which is interesting but not always my thing. But they are not all the schismatics they are painted as. They are friendly, welcoming people. Some believe that the Pope’s seat is vacant, but many do not. To excommunicate them all is a shocking way for a father to treat his children. Do your own research. See for yourself before believing all the gossip.
1 Like
It is not about the Latin mass that is but one issue. It is about recognition that that Vatican II is divinely inspired. The SSPX people believe V II was in error. It can’t be! Yes errors were made in the implementation but the teachings are true.
The SSPX people need to recognize that The Holy Spirit kept the council free from serious error.
1 Like
I have read a little about the SSPX followers/members. Personally I find them uplifting. Growing up I attended church when the mass was said in Latin. Granted, I didn’t speak Latin but the mass held a unique and definite reverence. Then suddenly things changed; no Latin, the altar was turned around and things continued to change and for a long time I strayed from the Catholic church because of the drastic changes - acceptance of ‘politically correct social bias’ in lieu of what I learned in my young years as a Catholic.
I do not condemn those adhering to the old liturgy and those belonging to SSPX are simply following the doctrine of the Church as it was instead of a modernized and politicized doctrine.
To excommunicate them is a travesty in my view.
1 Like
The issue is that they do not accept the teaching authority of the church. When V II was announced they said nothing will change. The document of VII were all approved by over 90% of the Bishops. Many things changed but not teachings on faith and morals.
1 Like
The error the SSPX makes is not the Latin Mass! By the way mass in St Peter’s has been said facing the people since it was built! The core issue is did Vatican II authority teach the faith? Of course it did. All of the Bishops of the world gather and approve documents with greater than a 90 % vote! Now some things people believe and have been told were part of V II are not. Use of the communion rail for example.
The SSPX FOLKS WANT NO CHANGES AND DENY the validity of V II. In that they are in error. For me accepting the churches leadership has caused me to grow in faith. Born in 1940 I have embraced a lot of change and have grown. I hope the same for you.
1 Like
But this is precisely what the SSPX is challenging – rightly in my view. As regards the nature of the Church, it’s relationship to the State and to (false) religions, the Second Vatican Council, and the reforms that applied and interpreted it, are difficult to reconcile with previous teaching and practice.
For example, is the Roman Catholic Church the same thing as the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ? Prior to the Council: yes. After the council: no.
Thanks for your response. The Bishops of the world meet and produce 18 ? Documents each of them had over 90 percent approval. That is good enough for me. There were many other things said that did not get approved. To deny the teaching in those documents is to no longer be Catholic in my view. I believe that is the teaching of the Church.
That really ought to be enough.
But today faithful Catholics too often have cause to resist their bishops, their lords. The history of the Council is a complicated one, but the texts we are left with present difficulties.
For example, the Second Vatican Council texts (DH 2) read: “The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.”
But for Catholics this should be a problematic statement. Pius IX in Quanta Cura condemned the following statement: “Liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society.”
In regards to Religious Liberty, the texts of the Council represent a new orientation, one that many Catholics recognize as foreign to the mind of the Church.
It is understood that Catholics must obey the authority of the Church. Advocating for obedience here is besides the point. The question here is, what does true obedience look like?