I just got back from my first sedevacantist mass. i don't want to name the organization. The sermon from the priest was absolutely terrible in my opinion. The priest sounds like a weird guy. If I had children I would not want them around this man, and I definetly would not want them attending a school or academy where he is involved based on what I heard today.

I live more than one hour away from this church so technically I'm not even required to be there by cannon law. But what if I was? What if a sedevacantist lives right next door to a sedevacantist chapel: SSPV, CMRI, Independent, etc....but you are very uncomftorable with the priest. Are you required to still go a sedevacantist mass every sunday under pain of mortal sin? Is it the same situation pre-Vatican II where catholics were required to go every sunday? Or does the crisis in the church execuse this demand under certain circuмstances?

Attending this mass today made me appreciate the SSPX priests, even though I disagree with their theological position regarding the papacy.

Because of the lack of canonical status for "sedevacantist chapels", an obligation cannot apply:

Can. 1249. Legi de audiendo Sacro satisfacit qui Missae adest quocunque catholico ritu celebretur, sub dio aut in quacunque ecclesia vel oratorio publico aut semi-publico et in privatis coemeteriorum aediculis de quibus in can. 1190, non vero in aliis oratoriis privatis, nisi hoc privilegium a Sede Apostolica concessum fuerit

Still, the holy virtue of Charity urges to attend Mass, especially on those days.

I'm confused as to the nature of your situation...

Is this a question of whether or not to attend Mass due to the priest OR whether or not to attend a sede Mass due to the priest (as in, you'd still be going to Mass, be it EF or SSPX or indie)?

Either way, I don't think not attending would be mortally sinful, but I'm not even sure what you're asking.

Quote from: curiouscatholic23

Well then how come most sedevacantist chapels talk about sunday obligations and holy days of obligation under pain of mortal sin? Are these sedevacantist chapels/organizations asserting more power than they actually have?

Your assumption is correct.
But I have to say that Sunday obligation does indeed oblige under pain of mortal sin. For somebody who follows the sedevacantist thesis, though, one could simply not attend Mass at a canonically established Mass location (maybe apart from those very few old parish priests within their own parish). Obviously, this fact excuses from any sin in this regard.

You can simply check the veracity of my statement by looking up what those terms "Church", "public" or "semi-public" oratory etc mean. You will find out that none of those can be applied to those un-canonically established Mass centers.

Both the SSPX and the CMRI state openly that one is required to show up every Sunday and Holy Day. After more research, I don't think they have the authority to do that since they are not under a diocesan bishop. Don't get me wrong, I want to go to mass every sunday, but I don't appreciate being told by a SSPX or CMRI priest that I NEED to be there every Sunday under pain of mortal sin.

I can perfectly understand your feelings there (and I share them!).

In you specific situation, one should also look at the Church practice prior to Vatican II. Even in these times, one was dispensed rather easily of the Sunday obligation, e.g. if one was too poor to afford decent clothing.
In your case, conceding obligation to attend Mass there, living more than an hour away (even though I think Church Law needs some actualizations in regards to modern ways of transportation) and the possibility of scandal to you and your family, you are clearly dispensed.

I would strongly advise to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel, if this is closer or more convenient for you. Their clergymen are better trained and their chapels have a much better parish life than most sedevacantist places.

By the way: In private, quite a few traditionalists priests admit that the faithful cannot fulfill Sunday obligation in their chapels.  

I can perfectly understand your feelings there (and I share them!).

In you specific situation, one should also look at the Church practice prior to Vatican II. Even in these times, one was dispensed rather easily of the Sunday obligation, e.g. if one was too poor to afford decent clothing.
In your case, conceding obligation to attend Mass there, living more than an hour away (even though I think Church Law needs some actualizations in regards to modern ways of transportation) and the possibility of scandal to you and your family, you are clearly dispensed.

I would strongly advise to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel, if this is closer or more convenient for you. Their clergymen are better trained and their chapels have a much better parish life than most sedevacantist places.

By the way: In private, quite a few traditionalists priests admit that the faithful cannot fulfill Sunday obligation in their chapels.  

Thank you. For the record, I was harcore SSPX, then stopped because I became a sede. I stopped because I was told by a well respected sedevacantist bishop that he thought it was a mortal sin for me to assist at an SSPX mass over the "una cuм" issue.

I have now decided to resume attending the SSPX and ignore the bishops word. If I go to hell over it, then so be it. Im listening to this video from the Dimond Brothers as we speak......

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Where_to_Mass.html

Why do you say their clergy are better trained when many/most of the sede priests or rather bishops who have gone out on their own over dispute with SSPX were trained at SSPX?

You are right there. But I don´t know if the majority of sedevacantist clergy in the US is former SSPX clergy.
Still, formation during those early days of the Society, when many of these priests left, was very diverse because of the still very confused situation in the 70s.
Also, since sedevacantism is largely unstructured, priests often lack a regular spiritual and community life, including a system of obedience and authority, which the SSPX prudently observes diligently.

Quote from: Darcy

Why do you say their clergy are better trained when many/most of the sede priests or rather bishops who have gone out on their own over dispute with SSPX were trained at SSPX?

You are right there. But I don´t know if the majority of sedevacantist clergy in the US is former SSPX clergy.
Still, formation during those early days of the Society, when many of these priests left, was very diverse because of the still very confused situation in the 70s.
Also, since sedevacantism is largely unstructured, priests often lack a regular spiritual and community life, including a system of obedience and authority, which the SSPX prudently observes diligently.

Thank you. I am a sedevacantist but I do not want to go to a sede chapel.The community is too small.
I am going to try SSPX because the individual priests must answer to a hierarchy which I think is extremely important but if they start talking any propaganda from the higher eschelons, I am not going to stay.