POPE FRANCIS FOR YEAR OF MERCY GRANTS THAT SSPX PRIESTS CAN VALIDLY ABSOLVE!

Huge news. This was under embargo till noon, Rome time, which must be honored. [UPDATE: The Bollettino is now available HERE]

It is about to be announced that the Holy Father has sent a letter to Archbishop Rino Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization about the upcoming Extraordinary Year of Mercy.

In this letter the Pope says that he is granting to all priests the faculty to absolve from the sin of abortion. He writes: “I have decided, notwithstanding anything to the contrary, to concede to all priests for the Jubilee Year the discretion to absolve of the sin of abortion those who have procured it and who, with contrite heart, seek forgiveness for it.” Interesting way to word it.

He also says that the faithful may go to … well… read it yourself. Here is a screenshot from the doc:

First, note the language. This letter says that he hopes that the SSPX will be reconciled. He says that he hears good things about the priests of the SSPX. But he says that the faithful may approach the priests of the SSPX for the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Penance) and that they shall validly and licitly receive absolution. He doesn’t say that he is granting the priests the faculty to receive sacramental confessions. He places the emphasis on the faithful. In effect, the priests are being given the faculty to hear confessions, but there is a different emphasis. I have the sense that it is the need of the faithful who otherwise might not go to a non-SSPX priest that the Holy Father is stressing. Think about the case of a person who is dying and there is, say, an ex-priest -a guy who was “laicized” because he committed certain crimes, present, the Church’s laws says that in the circumstances of the person’s danger of death any validly ordained priest automatically has the faculty validly to absolve. The need of the dying person is of such overwhelming importance that the law itself grants the ex-priest (or suspended priest, etc.) the faculty. The stress is on the need of the dying person, not on the priest. I think this is an analogous situation.

Along with this, the fact of Pope Francis’ move, together with the wording, confirms what I have been saying all along about the priests of the SSPX: they do not and have not had the faculty validly to absolve sins! The fact that this is being granted for the Year of Mercy bears out what I have been saying.

That said, if the Holy Father is willing to go this far with the priests of the SSPX, is it hard to imagine that this merciful concession might not be extended beyond the Year of Mercy? I would like to think so!

Next, this concession also underscores a point I have been making all along. If only Nixon could go to China, perhaps Pope Francis is the Pope who will reconcile the SSPX!

Additionally, this could irritate some bishops in, say, France… Germany…. And even though this may not be well received in certain circles, the Pope is doing it anyway.

Moreover, earlier in his pontificate, this Pope was pretty hard on priests. He seemed to be bashing them on a daily basis. This move to grant all priests in the world the faculty to lift the censure which results from procuring an abortion is a sign of his confidence in priests… for a change.

I take heart from this bold move – which makes so much sense (to me at least) – in favor of the access the faithful will have to sacrament of penance. I hope that it will also spark a wider discussion on the positive things that will come from the reconciliation of the SSPX. I hope that discussion takes place even among the SSPXers themselves.

May all the followers of the SSPX , please God, look at this move with joy and with gratitude for the concern the Pope is showing to them.

But… remember, the Year of Mercy hasn’t started yet and the SSPX does not yet have their faculty. GO TO CONFESSION with priest with faculties!

The Fishwrap has posted on this now. They get it wrong, of course. They openly call the SSPXers “schismatic”.

Just for the record, whoever told you this was wrong.

Though for the moment I cannot precisely recall all sources for what I was speaking towards, I have seen descriptions to the effect within Roman Catholic's commentaries, including that of trained priests. It must have been one of those oogly-boogly post Vatican II Novus Ordo dudes that the SSPX'ers have their cassocks all a-skitter about?

Which is why I mentioned it on this thread, for there is a range of expression on the subject, even within Catholicism and the more formal teachings there, similar to how there is often (more often, in regards to other subject matter perhaps) range of teaching on other points of theology which may be referenced and relied upon --- that do not always say the same things, leaving one able to argue differing sides of various points of theology, while never leaving formal "teachings", if but needing to rely on Vatican II and post Vatican II papal letters, and the writings of prominent theologians, and influential priests of lesser perceived ranking.

The priest has the power to forgive sins.

And so do you, and so does myself, when we are sinned against.

In fact, one can say we are told by God that we must, or else our own sins will not be forgiven.

"Whatever you bind on earth has already been bound in heaven"

Then the matter is not entirely dependent upon someone to come along and bind what had already been bound. Wouldn't that be to simply repeat, go over again, what had been already in existence? Pretty much like I had said in previous comment . do you validate parking here?

This power is contingent upon the priests' obedience to the Church

Scholastic fantasy. At no time & place within Scripture itself this "power" you speak of be contingent upon conformance to the later customs and traditions that arose --- not sourced from the earliest iterations of the Church, but some time later.

At the time and place of John the Baptist baptizing sinners for the remittance of sins, who were those persons confessing their sins to?

For the record, allow me to answer that;

To one another, those people who were themselves sinners --- were confessing their own sins to one another. Imagine your surprise if that were to sink in...

That notion, that we are to confess our sins (but not necessarily to some set-apart over all other Christians, 'priestly class') is also later confirmed within James 5:16;

"Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed..."

So what then? What does this tell us?
Are we to contemplate being "healed" but not forgiven? I can just hear someone out there thinking that, though likely not yourself going there, then trying to stay there, rooting around as for like a hidden truffle...

At the time of John the Baptist,
Where was the priesthood then? Virtually nonexistent save but in the Temple, which was some time not so long later, overthrown.

In the meantime when the church began to grow, and more and more were baptized, prayed over, and received the Holy Spirit, that was the priesthood, albeit there are differing gifts of the Spirit given (from on high) among members of the church.

So where was a priesthood that was empowered, incumbent upon obedience to the church?

I'll tell you. It was in each and every believer, according to passages that confirm that from elsewhere, most acutely (and scattered, repeated, thus confirmed) throughout the writings of Paul.

Where sin is, grace abounds. Its more a matter of finding that grace, and the forgiveness which allows the Lord God to extend that from Himself, to us.

If some chose to have themselves assisted in that process by those they think of as being "priests" then so be it.

Yet to build up a religious system that requires that, and then make things out to be (from other Romish assertions) that the forgiveness of God be unattainable except for through submission to this priestly class -- would be to preclude all not kowtowing to and submitting to Romanist-centric theological positions the possibility of forgiveness of God which He otherwise most freely supplies.

It's like some people attempted long ago to build fencing and walls all around the waters of life, proclaiming that if any not pass their own kiosks --- the water be inaccessible.

The Lord our God had different plans.

John 7

37 On the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. 38 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.”"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Can't Rome get ANYTHING right?

You noticed; too?