CathInfo.com

1) Traditionally, the SSPX taught us that we could not attend Ecclesia Dei chapels;

2) One of the reasons was that, even if everything said and done were Catholic and orthodox, they were still omitting to teach the faithful about the poisons contained in the doctrines of Vatican II;

3) And through this omission, these chapels represented a danger to the faith;

4) By refusing to inoculate the faithful, leaving them susceptible to the sophisms and heresies of the modernists and Vatican II.

5) Now consider your SSPX chapel;

6) Where perhaps no sign of compromise has yet appeared;

7) And perhaps your priest even privately sympathizes with Bishop Williamson and Archbishop Lefebvre;

8) Yet he refuses to publicly condemn the doctrines contained in the recently revealed doctrinal declaration (which substantially declared that the doctrines of Vatican II are implicitly contained within tradition);

9) Do not his omissions represent as much a danger to the faith as an indult chapel, insofar as both refuse to condemn doctrinal error?

10) And if that is the case, was not the SSPX wrong to have formerly condemned indult chapel attendance on this account;

11) Or if they were correct, does it not hold perfectly true against the chapels manned by silent priests today?

12) Or perhaps this particular reason for avoiding indult chapels was simply another reason to avoid them, but not sufficient to ban attendance at them?

 :scratchchin:

You're making more sense to me.

Quote from: SeanJohnson

12) Or perhaps this particular reason for avoiding indult chapels was simply another reason to avoid them, but not sufficient to ban attendance at them?

Does the SSPX's position on ED groups vary depending on whether or not you otherwise have access to the Sacraments?

Well, they have always permitted attendance at indult chapels in case of necessity.

But other than that, it has always been prohibited, primarily because the 1988 indult (Ecclesia Dei Adflicta) did not abrogate the previous 1984 indult, which stated that by mere attendance at an approved traditional Mass, you were acknowledging the doctrinal uprightness of the New Mass.

But I am not sure what the answer to your specific question is.

It could become relevant if one was banned from an SSPX chapel, and would otherwise have to wait several weeks until a resistance priest came around on circuit, so I would be curious to read a learned answer to your question.

And perhaps your priest even privately sympathizes with Bishop Williamson and Archbishop Lefebvre;

I assume you mean an Ecclesia Dei priest? I would be worried if an SSPX priest has to keep his sympathies private.