CatholicCrusader Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Nov 8 2004, 03:12 PM'] the SSPX is valid, yes, but illicit. If there is no alternative then yeah you can go. I wouldn't suggest receiving Communion, but as I said, it is valid. [/quote] That makes no sense. Why would you say NOT to receive the Blessed Sacrament? That is ridiculous. To not receive wen you typically would merely because it's SSPX would be an insult to Christ, Who is just as Present on their Altar as He is on a Novus Ordo table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God Conquers Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Just because it is valid does not mean you should be going. Listen, COMMUNION is an assent of the will to the whole teaching of a specific COMMUNITY. If you are in communion with Rome and the Catholci CHurch, you may not recieve communion anywhere else, for it denegrates your beliefs and the beliefs of that other community who doen not agree with you... if they held the same beliefs then their masses would not be illicit. The only quid pro quo is if it is out of necessity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='God Conquers' date='Nov 8 2004, 03:29 PM'] Just because it is valid does not mean you should be going. Listen, COMMUNION is an assent of the will to the whole teaching of a specific COMMUNITY. If you are in communion with Rome and the Catholci CHurch, you may not recieve communion anywhere else, for it denegrates your beliefs and the beliefs of that other community who doen not agree with you... if they held the same beliefs then their masses would not be illicit. The only quid pro quo is if it is out of necessity. [/quote] You haven't given any authoritative explanation for that... Ecclesia Dei Commision and Cardinal Hoyos says you can go if you can't get to a Traditional Mass. And Communion is about the Sacrament. When you receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist, you receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinty of Christ. That is what the purpose of the Eucharist is. If you don't receive merely because it is an SSPX Mass, you insult Christ as to say He is not really Present merely because the Priest is suspended (and not all the Priests who say Mass at their chapels are suspended... some aren't a part of the Society). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Announcements are to be only made after the Prayer after Communon. To take Communion with those in schism [unless you cannot find any other legitimate Mass] would seem to indicate they are an acceptable alternative. They are not, as the sermon you heard idicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 8 2004, 01:27 PM'] That makes no sense. Why would you say NOT to receive the Blessed Sacrament? That is ridiculous. To not receive wen you typically would merely because it's SSPX would be an insult to Christ, Who is just as Present on their Altar as He is on a Novus Ordo table. [/quote] For the same reason you don't in an Orthodox Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 8 2004, 01:37 PM'] And Communion is about the Sacrament. When you receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist, you receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinty of Christ. That is what the purpose of the Eucharist is. If you don't receive merely because it is an SSPX Mass, you insult Christ as to say He is not really Present merely because the Priest is suspended (and not all the Priests who say Mass at their chapels are suspended... some aren't a part of the Society). [/quote] Communion is also about the "Amen." If you don't believe all that is taught (by the Church, by the schismatics, depending on where you are), then don't say "Amen." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Ok here we go again. Let me make some preliminary comments before I engage this discussion. First, I am not in any way shape or form affiliated with the SSPX. I attend a Tridentine Mass in Washington DC (approved by Cardinal McCarrick) and Baltimore (approved by Cardinal Keeler). Second, do not mistake what I say here as a defense of the SSPX itself. What I am simply trying to ensure is that any criticism is legitimate and that lies or untruths are not being spread. We need to be accurate, very precise, in our criticism or we do no good for either side. Keep in mind as well that there is much pressure from within the SSPX as well as from without, both on the Society and on Rome, to come to an amicable agreement. Both sides realize that the longer the separation goes the harder it will be to fix. The time is becoming very ripe for re-union, especially considering the ailing health of the Holy Father. Be assured that both sides are aware of this and are currently pursuing an answer to the question of how to make it happen. Pray that it happens soon. It will be to the benefit of all if it does. That being said, I'll now proceed. XIX: I'm not going to comment on the things the priest said. I have no way of knowing how accurate you related it and I was not there to hear context or qualification, nor specific terms which could change the apparent meaning. I'll stick mostly with your comments. [quote]I think my problem really began before they read the homily. They started the announcements there (which struck me as odd, maybe they are supposed to do that during the SSPX?) Either way, I still think that announcements should happen after the communion.[/quote] [quote]That whole rant happened BEFORE THE GOSPEL READING. I certainly hope for his sake that pre-Gospel announcements are licit in the SSPX.[/quote] In the Trid. MAss the Gospel is read at the Altar in Latin. Then the priest comes to the pulpit for the sermon. Before he begins the sermon (which is the teaching directing and instructing part of Mass), he reads the announcements, then he re-reads the reading and gospel in English for the sake of instruction, and then he delivers the sermon. This is perfectly normal and quite fitting for reasons that are pointless to discuss here. [quote]Listen, if the Pope says N.O. is valid, the NO is valid. END OF STORY.[/quote] The SSPX does not deny the validity of the N.O. itself. [quote]I mean, even the part about the Protestants and the Muslims was way out of line, because his comments were very judgemental of the person, (not just the act) and also uncharitable.[/quote] Read the writings of some of the saints. They make the most brutal priests today look like power puffs. [quote]So...it'll be a while before I go back to another Latin Mass of any kind.[/quote] Very poor logic. Even if the priest was a total wack job (and he may very well have been) that is no reason to reject the Latin Mass. Consider the same logic in the other direction: If I were to walk into a wacko liberal N.O. church and hear the priest saying ridiculous things and I therefore condemned the NO as a result. It would be foolish to condemn (or avoid) the whole thing based on one bad experience. [quote]that they weren't totally valid, but at least partially[/quote] There is no such thing as partial validity when it comes to the Mass. It is either valid or not, and the SSPX Masses are of unquestionable validity. Ironmonk: [quote]I do not believe their "mass" is valid.[/quote] There is no question about the validity of the SSPX Masses. This has been affirmed by Rome in documents already quoted here. [quote]they are schismatic[/quote] Technically speaking, only the four bishops who were illicitly consecrated would be schismatic (if in fact they are, which is also hotly debated). Beyond that, only those priests and faithful who "formally adhere" to the schism would be schismatic. The interesting thing is, Rome will not say what constitutes Formal adherence. [quote]possibly heretical[/quote] Strong accusation. If you're not going to back it up, don't say it. There is not a single doctrine of the Catholic Faith that they "pertinaciously" deny. If you can find one, I would love to se it. Until then, I will maintain that this is calumny. Dave: [quote]And there's some debate as to whether or not their Masses would fulfill a Catholic's Sunday obligation. If it was an emergency or totally impossible to get to an illicit Mass, it would fulfill it, I believe. But if it's not an emergency, then it might not fulfill your obligation. [/quote] I think it's a pretty safe bet that your obligation is fulfilled. Msgr. Perl was quite clear on that. But he also advised against going. It was a rather curious answer at the very least. But you are correct; there is still much debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Nov 8 2004, 03:42 PM'] Announcements are to be only made after the Prayer after Communon. [/quote] Not at the Tridentine Mass. The sermon is the only interruption of the Mass. After that the Mass flows through without disturbance or any distraction from the ritual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 I just realized that Catholic Crusader made some of the same points as I did while I was typing my response. I apologize for anything that was repeated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 8 2004, 03:07 PM'] the SSPX IS NOT IN SCHISM. If they were in schism, then why are their marriages and Confessions invalid? The Church recognizes the marriages of the Eastern Orthodox schismatics, and even all the heretical religions, as well. The reason they are not valid is that they are not in schism. They have their faculties suspended. If they were not a part of the Church, then their marriages would be valid, just as the Eastern schismatics et al. are. [/quote] This seems to me to be one of the best arguments for the SSPX not being in schism. It seems that Rome is coming down on both sides of this issue, depending on who you talk to. I wish they would speak with one voice, at least for the sake of clarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Nov 8 2004, 03:46 PM'] Communion is also about the "Amen." If you don't believe all that is taught (by the Church, by the schismatics, depending on where you are), then don't say "Amen." [/quote] You don't say "Amen" in the Traditional Mass... the Priest says it all: "Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam. Amen." So, I guess it's OK ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='popestpiusx' date='Nov 8 2004, 02:04 PM'] This seems to me to be one of the best arguments for the SSPX not being in schism. It seems that Rome is coming down on both sides of this issue, depending on who you talk to. I wish they would speak with one voice, at least for the sake of clarity. [/quote] The Pope, as final authority on Canon Law, has said they are. I think that's the opinion non-dissenting theologians should hold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 8 2004, 02:07 PM'] Traditional Mass [/quote] I know this is off topic, but I've been wondering. Why is it the "Traditional Mass," for the Traditions of the Mass began well before Trent, and I'm sure that wasn't the end or beginning of our Tradition. Also, wouldn't there be other Masses, the older ones, that are actually more traditional? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Take this discussion outside of phatmass. It's closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts