Moral Consequences Of Attending Sspx Mass

[To Jesus Through Mary]

Many thanks!

 

Something to remember is that there is no weekly requirement to receive Holy Communion, so there is no reason to receive or not receive Holy Communion if you are attending Sunday Mass at an SSPX Chapel. However, I would not receive, not because doing so would be a sin, but because by NOT doing so, I would be stating, very subtly, that I do not agree with the SSPX on the legality of their Masses. That would be a good thing (in my opinion). Receiving Communion at an SSPX Chapel is a missed opportunity, I should think, but that's probably all it is. 

 

Wouldn't you, by attending a SSPX Mass, being giving the opposite impression of what you are trying to get across by not receiving Communion? Especially since most dioceses have access to the TLM in parishes that are in union with Rome? If your desire is to go to the old Mass, and you could fulfill this desire without going to a society that is opening rebelling against the Holy See, why would you do otherwise? Also, as a side not (not directed at you- just in general) when we talk about not receiving Holy Communion it's a big deal. At least it should be. We are missing out on infinite graces when we do not receive. This is, of course, if the person is in a state of grace. 

[To Jesus Through Mary]

Dup. post

Edited June 12, 2013 by To Jesus Through Mary

[arfink]

I tend to agree with TJTM, if for some reason the health of your soul requires you to have access to a traditional Latin mass and a Church that is not part of a rebellious movement is offering it, you should probably steer clear of the SSPX.

 

If the health of your soul does not require you to have access to the traditional Latin mass, then why would you seek out the SSPX in the first place? Curiosity? That confuses me.

[KnightofChrist]

Wouldn't you, by attending a SSPX Mass, being giving the opposite impression of what you are trying to get across by not receiving Communion? Especially since most dioceses have access to the Traditional Latin Mass in parishes that are in union with Rome? If your desire is to go to the old Mass, and you could fulfill this desire without going to a society that is opening rebelling against the Holy See, why would you do otherwise? Also, as a side not (not directed at you- just in general) when we talk about not receiving Holy Communion it's a big deal. At least it should be. We are missing out on infinite graces when we do not receive. This is, of course, if the person is in a state of grace. 

 

The Church has given permission for members of the laity to attend Mass and SSPX chapels, simple attendance is not an impression or sign of rebellion against the Church. Many more parishes worldwide offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass compared to the past. But it is false that most offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass, and many that do only do so once a month or less. Many Bishops remain hostile to it, and fight it. I'm not sure the Church agrees that the SSPX is in "open rebellion" against the Holy See, that type language simply isn't being used. So we should avoid it as well.  Dare I say faithful Catholics have much more in common with the SSPX than liberal Catholics, and the SSPX is far more loyal to the Pope and the Holy See than liberal Catholics many of which can present themselves openly as being in full union with Rome, and at the same time clearly and undoubtedly be in open rebellion against the Faith itself as well as the Holy See.

 

Pray of unity of the Church.

[Nihil Obstat]

I tend to agree with TJTM, if for some reason the health of your soul requires you to have access to a traditional Latin mass and a Church that is not part of a rebellious movement is offering it, you should probably steer clear of the SSPX.

 

If the health of your soul does not require you to have access to the traditional Latin mass, then why would you seek out the SSPX in the first place? Curiosity? That confuses me.

I notice that you specified "health of your soul", as well as having or not having access to an 'approved' traditional Mass. Getting a bit deeper, what are your thoughts on that part specifically? How much desire for the traditional Mass would be enough in your opinion to justify attending an SSPX Mass, assuming it was the only one available?

I have said for a while, if I did not have the FSSP close by, I would be very conflicted. Would I go to the SSPX Mass? Would I go regularly? That is a question I am glad I do not have to answer right now, because it does trouble me. My bishop has been clear that he does not want the SSPX around, and does not want Calgarian Catholics going to them. It is a tough situation.

 

As always, we must pray that their situation is resolved.

[Nihil Obstat]

The Church has given permission for members of the laity to attend Mass and SSPX chapels, simple attendance is not an impression or sign of rebellion against the Church. Many more parishes worldwide offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass compared to the past. But it is false that most offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass, and many that do only do so once a month or less. Many Bishops remain hostile to it, and fight it. I'm not sure the Church agrees that the SSPX is in "open rebellion" against the Holy See, that type language simply isn't being used. So we should avoid it as well.  Dare I say faithful Catholics have much more in common with the SSPX than liberal Catholics, and the SSPX is far more loyal to the Pope and the Holy See than liberal Catholics many of which can present themselves openly as being in full union with Rome, and at the same time clearly and undoubtedly be in open rebellion against the Faith itself as well as the Holy See.

 

Pray of unity of the Church.

In that sense, personally I find it encouraging that Bishop Williamson was expelled. 

I do not think he is a bad person, per se, but I think he has been tripped up by a spirit that is not of God, and was a very bad influence on the Society.

[KnightofChrist]

The Church has given permission for members of the laity to attend Mass and SSPX chapels, simple attendance is not an impression or sign of rebellion against the Church. Many more parishes worldwide offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass compared to the past. But it is false that most offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass, and many that do only do so once a month or less. Many Bishops remain hostile to it, and fight it. I'm not sure the Church agrees that the SSPX is in "open rebellion" against the Holy See, that type language simply isn't being used. So we should avoid it as well.  Dare I say faithful Catholics have much more in common with the SSPX than liberal Catholics, and the SSPX is far more loyal to the Pope and the Holy See than liberal Catholics many of which can present themselves openly as being in full union with Rome, and at the same time clearly and undoubtedly be in open rebellion against the Faith itself as well as the Holy See.

 

Pray of unity of the Church.

 

That should be "attend Mass at SSPX chapels"...
 

[arfink]

I notice that you specified "health of your soul", as well as having or not having access to an 'approved' traditional Mass. Getting a bit deeper, what are your thoughts on that part specifically? How much desire for the traditional Mass would be enough in your opinion to justify attending an SSPX Mass, assuming it was the only one available?

I have said for a while, if I did not have the FSSP close by, I would be very conflicted. Would I go to the SSPX Mass? Would I go regularly? That is a question I am glad I do not have to answer right now, because it does trouble me. My bishop has been clear that he does not want the SSPX around, and does not want Calgarian Catholics going to them. It is a tough situation.

 

As always, we must pray that their situation is resolved.

 

I left it vague on purpose, because I think that's subjective. Some people have scruples, and they must behave in a particular way in order to avoid acting against their consciences, while others do not have this problem, and so on. I don't think it can be quantified at all.

 

We know as Catholics that our consciences, if properly formed, must be obeyed. But even an improperly formed consistence, if intentionally disobeyed, leaves us guilty of sin. I know that there are Catholics whose consciences are formed such that they believe themselves to be committing acts of wrongdoing by attending the Ordinary Form of the mass. These are Catholics for whom the Extraordinary Form becomes a matter of the health of their souls, and I would say that if they are barred from the Extraordinary Form in a licit way, they could seek the SSPX.

 

Or even more subjectively, there are even more Catholics who find the Extraordinary Form encourages their spiritual life more. How much is that benefit worth, however, when you risk the errors of the SSPX in the process? I do think it's very subjective, and will definitely differ from one person to the next.

 

For my part, I see no particular advantage to my soul by attending the Extraordinary Form of the mass, so this question doesn't much bother me. But yeah, I understand for many people it's of such paramount importance to them that to be without the EF mass, they would be at risk in their souls or their prayer lives. It's tricky.

Edited June 12, 2013 by arfink

[KnightofChrist]

In that sense, personally I find it encouraging that Bishop Williamson was expelled. 

I do not think he is a bad person, per se, but I think he has been tripped up by a spirit that is not of God, and was a very bad influence on the Society.

 

I agree, and because he fought so hard against full union with Rome, his being expelled should be a hopeful sign to all just how much the SSPX does want full union with Rome.

[Papist]

And we're off....

[arfink]

And we're off....

 

:deadhorse:

[KnightofChrist]

And we're off....

 

Ugh, I certainly hope not, not like in the pass anyway. Sometimes it seems people would like the treat the SSPX like the prodigal son was treated by his brother, rather than take the example of the father.

 

Here's hoping.

[Papist]

Ugh, I certainly hope not, not like in the pass anyway. Sometimes it seems people would like the treat the SSPX like the prodigal son was treated by his brother, rather than take the example of the father.

 

Here's hoping.

 

Agreed. It is a sticky conversation. It is not black and white as most people think. 

[To Jesus Through Mary]

The Church has given permission for members of the laity to attend Mass and SSPX chapels, simple attendance is not an impression or sign of rebellion against the Church. Many more parishes worldwide offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass compared to the past. But it is false that most offer the Extraordinary form of the Mass, and many that do only do so once a month or less. Many Bishops remain hostile to it, and fight it. I'm not sure the Church agrees that the SSPX is in "open rebellion" against the Holy See, that type language simply isn't being used. So we should avoid it as well.  Dare I say faithful Catholics have much more in common with the SSPX than liberal Catholics, and the SSPX is far more loyal to the Pope and the Holy See than liberal Catholics many of which can present themselves openly as being in full union with Rome, and at the same time clearly and undoubtedly be in open rebellion against the Faith itself as well as the Holy See.

 

Pray of unity of the Church.

 

My point was if you don't receive Communion to make a "subtle point" what kind of point are you making by going to a SSPX Mass. 

 

I did not know that the Church had given permission for the laity to attend Mass at SSPX Chapels. Which Church doc discusses this? (I believe you, I would just like to learn more about this)

 

As for the language, forgive my ignorance, but what would be the appropriate language to use in this case?

Edited June 12, 2013 by To Jesus Through Mary

[BG45]

And we're off....

 

to see the wizard?