7 Common False SSPX Arguments

The seven most common arguments used by the SSPX and their supporters to justify their position as a legitimate one include:
1. Argument of Church's Perpetual Authorization: SSPX asserts that once the Church approves the establishment of a society, it implies a perpetual mandate, unless explicitly revoked. This logic wrongly suggests that the SSPX still operates under latent approval from its original canonical recognition, despite clear Church actions to the contrary.
2. Misrepresentation of Canonical Suppression: SSPX frequently claims that their suppression was invalid due to procedural defects or because it was not executed by the direct authority of the Pope himself. However, documentation clearly disputes this, affirming that proper canonical authority was indeed exercised during their suppression, including by the Pope.
3. Appeals to the Principle of Epikeia: SSPX advocates often misuse the principle of epikeia, which concerns the benign application of law in extraordinary circumstances, to justify disobeying Church laws and directives. They argue these laws are not binding when they consider them unjust or harmful to the salvation of souls.
4. Claim of Emergency Jurisdiction: SSPX argues they have jurisdiction supplied by the church due to an alleged state of emergency (crisis in the Church). However, this is not recognized under canonical or sacramental theology as a legitimate source of continuous jurisdiction.
5. Claims of Valid Ministry Operations: Despite lacking canonical status, SSPX frequently argues their ministries (sacraments and ordinations) are valid and licit, failing to acknowledge the need for formal ecclesiastical approval and incardination requirements.
6. Misinterpretation of Papal Intentions and Actions: Often, SSPX interprets temporary permissions or limited acknowledgments from the Popes (such as the faculties to hear confessions granted during the Jubilee Year of Mercy) as signs of full regularisation or endorsement of their status.
..