I am torn in doubts regarding attending NO, ICK and FSSPX specifically for Mass and Eucharist (not for Confession, as it has recently been permitted by the Holy Father).

I do not wish to burn even the tiniest pinch of incense, but I still have profound doubts as to where the Truth lies.

My character is very much black and white and, therefore, I am led to understand that either conciliar Mass and Eucharist are sacrilegious or FSSPX conciliar Mass and Eucharist are sacrilegious.

I cannot reconcile the idea that both may be right at the same time as one should excludes the other, unless one can help me understand that this is not the case. Please do argue this case.

If my "one excludes the other" understanding is correct, then I will sin if I participate in the wrong Mass/Eucharist.

My challenge lies in that I still doubt that (i) conciliar, NO, ICK, etc., Masses and Eucharist are sacrilegious, just as I still doubt that (ii) FSSPX Masses and Eucharist are not sacrilegious.

Am I sinning if I participate in a Mass/Eucharist that is sacrilegious, if I think that it could be sacrilegious but I really, truly, am not yet sure that it is?

Does sin not require three elements?
(i) Grave matter;
(ii) Full knowledge;
(iii) Deliberate consent.

Am I sinning if I attend either, not fully knowing which is correct and which is in error?

Should I abstain from both until I fully know in my heart which is correct? What if this doubt will last for my entire life? Will my soul be lost because I could not determine which was error/correct and, therefore, abstain from Mass/Eucharist until I die?

Some of us may have good interntions and firm determination to seek the Truth for the salvation of our souls but may lack the knowledge and may be inadequately furnished to reach the correct determination regarding what to do about NO, ICK and FSSPX Mass and Eucharist.

I reached a point where I an no longer certain that V2 Masses are not sacrilegious but I have not yet reached the point where I am certain that FSSPX are not sacrilegious either!

Damned if I do and damned if I don't...

???

Help!

Thank you for all the time and knowledge that you are willing to share. I will watch the video and buy the book although I don't know when i will be able to find the time for a whole book. This community already suggested 5 that have gone on my reading list (and I have not read in years).

I watched the video and it was interesting. Unfortunately it did not answer my question:

A faithful who cannot be certain of which Mass/Eucharist is sacrilegious (SSPX or N.O.), what should he do?

Should he abstain from both or partake in either?

Is it sinful to partake in a Sacrament, if one doubts that it may be sacrilegious, but has no full knowledge that it actually is sacrilegious?

We are supposed to know before hand lest we sin. That's why God gave us all brains and the use of reason, He expects us to use them to figure out how best to know, love and serve Him so we do not offend Him on account of our being too lazy to find out first. That is the main reason He gave us all brains.

You should have no doubt that the conciliar religion is not Catholic, but if you do have doubts about that, then what you need to do is to compare it to that which it replaced, then believe your eyes. This is key because none of it will ever make sufficient sense and will likely only leave you in worse doubt if you do not believe your own eyes.  

We are all obliged to constantly beware, and to seek the truth, doing so leads all who do this to the Catholic Church. God's promise to us is that He will show us the way if we seek it when He told us; "Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. For every one that asketh, receiveth: and he that seeketh, findeth: and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened". Do what He says and you will be holding Him to His promise - and He will keep His promise and you will find what you need and you will lose your doubts.

And no, we are not permitted to partake of doubtful sacraments. Danger of death aside, nor are we permitted to partake of valid sacraments [confected] outside of the Church lest we sin. The sacraments are owned by the Church, as such She makes the rules concerning them - and that's one of Her rules. We do not need to prove the sacrament's invalidity, all we need to do is, after sufficient investigation, have reasonable doubt - which doubt abounds within the conciliar church.

Stick with pre-V2 papal encyclicals  - which for the most part, unlike V2 docs, are clearly written and are understood to mean what they say. Stick with the writings from only orthodox teachers, i.e. popes, priests, bishops, saints and theologians etc,. They will get you on the path you need to be on, but you still need to beware, being only human there are some things they got wrong. In time you will come to discern the difference and all the pieces will fit together.

And there's always this forum for when you get stuck - just ask.

1.
....
As I recall, an ICK priest has already told you that it is not a sin to attend an SSPX Mass.   Why do you question this?
...

2.
If you have not yet reached a conclusion about the status of the conciliar Church, the second Vatican Council, etc.,  you can nevertheless attend an SSPX Mass.   Attending Mass is not the same as choosing sides.  All you need is to be reasonably sure that it is a valid Mass.  

You need to attend Mass.  You need the Eucharist.  This is the primary means that God uses to impart grace to us.  To stop attending Mass while you try to figure this out will put you into a state of spiritual starvation.  You need to be nourished as you try to sort your way through the confusion.  You can figure out which group is the most correct later.  For now, just go a traditional Latin Mass.
...

3.
The more sources you go to for information, the more confused you will be.  Even asking at this forum means that you will receive a variety of contradictory answers from different perspectives.  There are major theological differences among forum members here.  I think that somebody has already recommended Archbishop Lefebvre's Letter to Confused Catholics.  (Online at http://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/  ) The author, as you may know, was a wise and saintly man.  I consider him a better source than anyone who posts to this forum (and certainly far superior to me.)

4.
Just start with that.  Read it many times and absorb it.  Pray.  Attend Mass and Confession.  Focus on your duties of your state of life.  You could tie yourself into knots trying to understand all the various ideas about the crisis in the Church.  You already seem to be heading towards scrupulosity, fretting that you will sin no matter what you do.  Would God really put us in such a situation?  That sort of worry comes from the Father of Lies.  Do your best and trust in God.

Thank you for your time and precious help.

1.
Yes, and ICK priest confirmed that SSPX Masses are valid but he may be misrepresenting Rome as other priests (Diocesis Ministers) in this same city told me the exact contrary.

To appreciate why I still question this concern, one must understand the struggle of Catholics like me, who just recently realised the crisis in which we are.

If you detach yourself from your convictions (I wish I had them), your knowledge and your understanding, then you can imagine how a faithful who is not erudite in Church matters and has just started studying and researching, feels overwhelmed with the enormity of what this community is presenting him and cannot elaborate his own firm opinion. Letting go of 54 years of convictions and beliefs takes time and strength.

I have not yet reached your level of confidence and while, YES, I do posses a brain, as Stubborn correctly points out, not everyone moves at the same speed.

2.
This is an excellent point. Thank you for the advice.

The ICK Mass should be safe from both perspectives. Someone who feels that either SSPX or NO must be sacrilegious, can attend ICK and feel safe because ICK is neither in the SSPX camp (possible sacrilege for lack of jurisdiction) nor in the N.O. camp (possible sacrilege for error in doctrine or Faith).

Thank you. Your advice offers me some respite. I had stopped receiving Eucharist since when I discovered this community and begun researching its claims and stances. It has been a very painful period. I look forward to Sunday ICK Mass and Eucharist.


3.
I purchased the book and I am waiting for it to be delivered. In the mean time I am watching videos concerning Card. Lefevbre and I can see exposed many contradictions within Rome itself but, recently, I see contradicionts even between the SSPX and its founder (which, as you mention, confuses me even more).


4.
Funny that you should say: "Focus on your duties of your state of life" as it was my new condition as Father of a four year old girl that triggered my research as I felt inadequate to be her moral guide.

Curiously, it was my super modernist (*) parish priest who caused my awakening. When I asked him to catechize me for my daughter's benefit he suggested that I research Catholic cathechism online. By pure chance (providence) I mispelled the words and this cathinfo forum came up.

(*) He offers Eucharist to the divorced, he finds that the cultural background of infanticide in Amazzonia makes the act understandable, tells me to stop going to confession so often, etc.).

I truly appreciate this community's patience with my questions and my annoying nitpicking because your endurance may be saving a soul. Actually two souls. My daughter depends on my re-version.

And let me add that the different perspectives of this community are the best part of it. These different opinions, at time belligerantly so, force me to elaborate my own, personal, opinion. A self generated opinion is always the best foundation for a belief and a conviction. If the Grace of God blesses this belief then it can withstand any future assault.

Please be patient with my enquiries and may God bless you for your advice and help, Jaynek.

Tommaso

Thank you for your time and precious help.

1.
Yes, and ICK priest confirmed that SSPX Masses are valid but he may be misrepresenting Rome as other priests (Diocesis Ministers) in this same city told me the exact contrary.

The official conciliar view is that the SSPX Mass is valid but illicit.  Here is a letter from the late Monsignor Perl writing on behalf of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (the Vatican organization in charge of the issue) that gives the details of their position:  http://salbert.tripod.com/SSPXMasses.htm  The ICK priest is the one who has correctly represented Rome.

A valid Mass is one in which the Eucharist is really the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ.  Illicit means that it breaks  Church law.  A Mass might be illicit for many different reasons, some more serious than others.  

There is no basis (as far as Rome is concerned) for claiming that an SSPX Mass is invalid.  Conciliar priests/bishops discourage people from attending because they consider it illicit.  The distinction between valid and licit confuses some people so the priests might not have explained this in a clear way.  Or they may have deliberately mislead you about the Mass being invalid to prevent you from going.  

Attending an illicit Mass might or might not be sinful depending on the circuмstances.  It is not inherently sacrilegious to attend an illicit Mass.  

 (possible sacrilege for lack of jurisdiction)

Could you explain what you mean this?  I cannot think of how this would be sacrilege.

The official conciliar view is that the SSPX Mass is valid but illicit.  Here is a letter from the late Monsignor Perl writing on behalf of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei (the Vatican organization in charge of the issue) that gives the details of their position:  http://salbert.tripod.com/SSPXMasses.htm  The ICK priest is the one who has correctly represented Rome.

A valid Mass is one in which the Eucharist is really the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ.  Illicit means that it breaks  Church law.  A Mass might be illicit for many different reasons, some more serious than others.  

There is no basis (as far as Rome is concerned) for claiming that an SSPX Mass is invalid.  Conciliar priests/bishops discourage people from attending because they consider it illicit.  The distinction between valid and licit confuses some people so the priests might not have explained this in a clear way.  Or they may have deliberately mislead you about the Mass being invalid to prevent you from going.  

Attending an illicit Mass might or might not be sinful depending on the circuмstances.  It is not inherently sacrilegious to attend an illicit Mass.  
Could you explain what you mean this?  I cannot think of how this would be sacrilege.

Allow me to start from your last question, as it is the most pertinent to the thread and most important to me.

And, please, allow me to turn your question to you as my inability to answer it is causing my doubts: is it sacrilegious to attend a valid but illicit Mass? Is it sacrilegious to partake an illicit or even invalid Eucharist?

This question is my biggest concern and it is what is stopping me from participating fully in an SSPX Mass.

Your distinction between "valid" and "licit" helped me to better understand this mess but not if it is sacrilegious to attend a valid, but illicit Mass. More importantly, my concern is about Eucharist. Is it sacrilegious to assume Eucharist with the knowledge that it may be illicit?

This community's arguments basically convinced me that it is permitted to attend an SSPX Mass as saying Mass does not require the priest's jurisdiction. But it is a completely different matter with the seven Sacraments which do require jurisdiction (am I wrong?). My doubt is that it is not sacrilegious to participate in an illicit Mass but it is sacrilegious to participate in an illicit sacrament.

As for the letter from Monsignor Perl, thank you, it was very useful even if circuмstances have changed recently with the Pope allowing SSPX priests to offer confession.

Conciliar priests lie knowingly to scare the faithful into doubt. I have been told that I will be automatically excommunicated if I take Holy Communion from an SSPX priest because they can only say Mass if authorized but cannot transubstantiate a host into the body of Christ which - even a simpleton as myself - understands to be a contradiction. The Sacrament of Ordination is not intermittent. Either one is, or is not, an ordained priest. And, if a priest can be legitimately and validly permitted to say Mass, even if only at times, then this implies that his Sacramental Ordination must be valid and legitimate always. Consequentially such priest always has the power to transubstantiate a host into the body of our Saviour, regardless of whether he is permitted or not to do so.

Allow me to start from your last question, as it is the most pertinent to the thread and most important to me.

And, please, allow me to turn your question to you as my inability to answer it is causing my doubts: is it sacrilegious to attend a valid but illicit Mass? Is it sacrilegious to partake an illicit or even invalid Eucharist?

This question is my biggest concern and it is what is stopping me from participating fully in an SSPX Mass.

Your distinction between "valid" and "licit" helped me to better understand this mess but not if it is sacrilegious to attend a valid, but illicit Mass. More importantly, my concern is about Eucharist. Is it sacrilegious to assume Eucharist with the knowledge that it may be illicit?

I will give my understanding of the conciliar perspective on answers to your questions, but I hope you will check with a trustworthy priest.  (The ICK priest who told you that SSPX Masses are valid sounds trustworthy.  I would not trust diocesan priests who tell you that SSPX Masses are not valid.)  

Usually sacrilege against the Eucharist refers to treating the Hosts with disrespect or irreverence  (for example, during Communion in the hand) or receiving Communion in a state of mortal sin.  Here is a conciliar source at https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=36218 that gives examples of "deliberate invalid reception of the sacraments, simulation of Mass, grave irreverence to the Eucharist." Here is a pre-conciliar source http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13321a.htm that says "the administration or reception of the sacraments (or in the case of the Holy Eucharist by celebration) in the state of mortal sin, as also by advertently doing any of those things invalidly."

I have never heard of a principle that participating in an illicit Mass is automatically sacrilegious, although, as you can see, it is sacrilege to deliberately participate in an invalid Sacrament.   In my experience, conciliar arguments against receiving Sacraments from SSPX typically rest on claims that the organization is in schism.  Participating, therefore, is an act of schism (a difficult position to support) or, at least, puts one in danger of developing a schismatic mentality.  Even so, there is a good argument from the conciliar perspective that it is permissible.  Here is an example of the argument: https://onepeterfive.com/sspx-mass-shelter/

This community's arguments basically convinced me that it is permitted to attend an SSPX Mass as saying Mass does not require the priest's jurisdiction. But it is a completely different matter with the seven Sacraments which do require jurisdiction (am I wrong?). My doubt is that it is not sacrilegious to participate in an illicit Mass but it is sacrilegious to participate in an illicit sacrament.

There used to be a question concerning the efficacy of the Sacrament of Confession when celebrated by SSPX priests on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction although I don't recall claims that it was sacrilegious.  The SSPX made an argument (which I personally found convincing) that they had supplied jurisdiction.  However, this is no longer an issue, since they now have jurisdiction by papal decree.

The other Sacrament affected by jurisdiction is that of Matrimony.  Again there is an SSPX argument for supplied jurisdiction.  If you are actually contemplating marriage, you may want to do the research to reach your own position on this.  If you are not getting married, then you can probably leave this question until later.

Conciliar priests lie knowingly to scare the faithful into doubt. I have been told that I will be automatically excommunicated if I take Holy Communion from an SSPX priest because they can only say Mass if authorized but cannot transubstantiate a host into the body of Christ which - even a simpleton as myself - understands to be a contradiction. The Sacrament of Ordination is not intermittent. Either one is, or is not, an ordained priest. And, if a priest can be legitimately and validly permitted to say Mass, even if only at times, then this implies that his Sacramental Ordination must be valid and legitimate always. Consequentially such priest always has the power to transubstantiate a host into the body of our Saviour, regardless of whether he is permitted or not to do so.

Here is an article from a conciliar perspective by a canon lawyer explaining why the 5 Sacraments not affected by jurisdiction are all validly performed by SSPX priests:  https://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/08/01/are-sspx-sacraments-valid-part-i/  As you can see, he says that SSPX priests have valid ordinations and can validly consecrate.  As you say, it makes no sense to claim that they can only validly consecrate when they have permission.  That is simply not how the Eucharist works.  

Any conciliar priest who makes such claims cannot be trusted.  You pretty much need to throw out any information you have received from such sources.  You cannot base decisions or doubts on it.  I have cited reasonable representatives of conciliar positions in this post.  Obviously, there is still disagreement between conciliar and SSPX positions, but it is not correct, even from the conciliar perspective, to claim that that receiving Holy Communion from an SSPX priest means automatic excommunication.