D
Denise1957
Guest
So you have no affiliation with the FSSP or any of the Ecclesia Dei communities. That’s what I thought. Thank you.
- Status
T
TrueLight
Guest
I’m trying to get confirmation of this, but celebrating the EF is the major reason societies like the FSSP were created and I really don’t believe they’re likely to be forced to celebrate the EF.I believe that the point that the Holy Father is making is that those priests who belong to the Ecclesia Dei communities, such as the FSSP, cannot refuse to celebrate the OF as a matter of principle. In other words, they must agree to celebrate both forms to show the unity between the forms and the unity of the Church and as he says in the letter, the Mass of Pau VI continues to be the norm in the Latin Church. It would be inconsistent to say that one is a Latin Catholic while refusing to celebrate the normal form of the Roman Rite.
Again, that’s not the issue in this situation. The issue is to help Father feel at home in his assignment and the OP seems to have managed that very well.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
Force is not the word that I would use. Remember, these are not consecrated religious. They are as secular a you are. There is very little that they can be forced to do. If it’s not in the law, it cannot be demanded of the secular Catholic.
I believe that the point that the Holy Father made in his letter was that they cannot make it a matter of principle. A matter of principle would be for them to say that they do not celebrate the OF because they don’t believe that it’s as holy as the EF. In fact the Holy Father addresses this point. We are not allowed to view the two forms as holier than. These priests who belong to the Ecclesia Dei communities may not take this position, because it’s theologically incorrect and illegal.
That would be like a Franciscan saying that he will not work at a middle class parish because it’s sin to do so. He’s taking a position on a matter of principle. The position is contrary to the faith of the Church. However, he can say that he will not work at at middle class parish because the rule commands that he live among the poor. In that statement, he’s not making a judgment about the middle class parish.
The same would apply to the Ecclesia Dei communities. To say that they celebrate only the EF, because it’s their particular contribution to the life of the Church is one thing. To say that they do not celebrate the OF, because it’s deficient in any way is contrary to theology and to law. That’s what the Holy Father is talking about.
The only person who can force them to celebrate the OF is the Holy Father. What they cannot do is refuse to celebrate it because of some imagined deficiency. That places them back in the same place as the SSPX.
Let’s use a simple example. Let’s say that they are invited to a papal mass, which is always in the OF. They can’t send back a message saying, “Thanks, but no thank you. We don’t concelebrate, because it’s wrong to do so or because there is something deficient with the OF.” If they say that, they are taking a position of principle, which is not allowed by the letter. If the Holy Father tells you that he wants you to concelebrate with him, you’re only allowed to ask, “What time do you want me there?” If the superior of the FSSP says that he wants to assign a particular priest to cover a certain OF mass, he can’t do that. That is contrary to the charism of the society. A superior cannot command what is contrary to the charism, only the pope or his delegate can do that.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
Wow. Somebody’s snappy.
Well, that’s the only reason they were created. They exist for no other reason. If the EF never existed (God forbid!) then the FSSP would never have existed. I highly doubt they’d be forced to celebrate the OF either, but theoretically it could happen. But I highly doubt someone would try to do that.
T
TrueLight
Guest
H
HelenRose
Guest
There has to be more to the story than this. This is not right. It does not make any sense at all.I’m not trying to bash traditionalists…
I’m looking for advice… I happen to like the Latin Mass if it helps
Apparently he was at the college’s seminary for his PhD at the time I was studying… And he “happened” upon it recently on…
I would like to hear his version of the situation.
J
JReducation
Guest
Remember that I said above that popes deliberately use ambiguous legal language that may not get the attention of the man in the pew, but gets the attention of the intended audience.
The term “principle” is one of those legal terms. In Church law, that term has a very powerful meaning. In ecclesial law, when you stand on principle, it means that you’re unwilling to move from that position.
They can’t say that they joined the FSSP to minister exclusively through the EF, because if you observe the letter, the Holy Father throws in another legal condition that was never used before. He says, “the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle”
The use of the term “adhere” is very deliberate. It means that they (the priests) are attached to the form, not the Church. He can only adhere to what the Church allows.
The few that don’t are in serious moral trouble. SP is very clear on that matter. This would put them outside of communion with Peter. It’s not a very wise choice at all. I can’t recall which doctor of the Church said it, but one of them said something very wise once. He said that he preferred to follow the pope, even if the pope was mistaken, because at the end of the day, it would be the pope who would have to answer for the mistake, not him.
I think the point is that many people who know very little or nothing about the FSSP or the other Ecclesia Dei institutes think that they have been given some special right to refuse the Ordinary Form. That would be a misrepresentation of the facts. Not knowing this actually makes people wonder why is there an FSSP and an SSPX.
For some reason some people just don’t get this part.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
P
petrel
Guest
Seconded. This is a public forum. It seems like this is airing of laundry which should be kept in-house.Agreed
P
petrel
Guest
My impression is that there is a range of views in the FSSP. In the extreme there are those who suspect that they should have gone with the SSPX. I have no doubt that these hard liners would never go to an OF mass and would have very severe views against those who do.I think the point is that many people who know very little or nothing about the FSSP or the other Ecclesia Dei institutes think that they have been given some special right to refuse the Ordinary Form. That would be a misrepresentation of the facts. Not knowing this actually makes people wonder why is there an FSSP and an SSPX.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
To regard the OF as being heretical or injurious to souls demonstrates the schismatic mentality that you would expect to find in the SSPX. The FSSP needs to reconcile with the OF and the local ordinary otherwise the EF will forever be associated with the schismatic element of the church instead of being regarded as a treasure of the church. This reminds me of Catholics after the reformation who started to regard the scriptures with suspicion because of the schismatics who brandished the scripture like a protest banner.
Catholics need to reclaim the scripture from the protestants, and they must reclaim the EF from the SSPX.
P
petrel
Guest
Well I think that FSSP priests must celebrate the OF once per year. But I am not sure about that. The FSSP would never have existed if the SSPX had obeyed the pope and stopped the ordination of the 4 bishops. So the FSSP is a testimony of obedience to the sovereign pontiff as much as they are there to guard and preserve the EF.
T
TrueLight
Guest
That’s not true EXCEPT they are strongly encouraged to attend the Chrism mass, but not all do.
T
TrueLight
Guest
You don’t have to be a “hardliner” to not celebrate or attend the OF.
W
w_s_s
Guest
No FSSP priest must celebrate the OF once per year.
Some bishops request the presence of the FSSP priests in their diocese at the Chrism Mass and some FSSP priests who receive such a request do attend and some of those who attend may even concelebrate.
On the other hand, however, some bishops don’t request the presence of the FSSP priests in their diocese at the Chrism Mass, and some FSSP priests who are requested to come to the Chrism Mass don’t go even though they are requested to do so, and most who do go, attend in choir and don’t concelebrate.
The primary purpose of the FSSP, according to the FSSP itself, is the sanctification of priests. That’s no surprise since that was also the founding purpose of the SSPX.
W
w_s_s
Guest
I shall not provide links, but it is not really difficult to find online explicit statements by priests in good standing that the OF Mass is deficient in comparison to the EF Mass. So I would guess that they aren’t as worried as you are Brother JR about that being contrary to theology and to law.
Or maybe you’re thinking about a different sort of deficiency than they are.
J
JReducation
Guest
The fact that they are not worried does not mean that they should not be, since the Holy Father himself makes this statement in his follow-up letter to SP. It behooves the rest of us to set the example by showing concern for what concerns the Holy Father.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
D
Denise1957
Guest
I think, too, that it would behoove all here to show concern for what Bl. Pope John Paul ll had to say regarding the showing of support for those who are attached to the Latin liturgical traditions. Here’s a quote from the Holy Father from the Motu Proprio, “Ecclesia Dei,” dated July 2, 1988:
"6 c) Moreover, respect everywhere must be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962.
5 c) To all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary tradition, I wish to manifest my will to facilitate their ecclesial communion by means of the necessary measures to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations. In this matter I ask for the support of the bishops and all those engaged in the pastoral ministry of the Church."
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html
"6 c) Moreover, respect everywhere must be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962.
5 c) To all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary tradition, I wish to manifest my will to facilitate their ecclesial communion by means of the necessary measures to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations. In this matter I ask for the support of the bishops and all those engaged in the pastoral ministry of the Church."
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei_en.html
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
I have read through this entire subject, all the posts, and have not seen one single example of anyone not respecting the Latin Liturgical Tradition. What are you talking about, and why are you so defensive and rude to Brother JR? All the posters here, except one and you, have been more than polite and have asked reasonable questions and given reasonable answers. No one else is having a problem with the tone of the discussion, except a person who made a disparaging remark against the FSSP and happened to be a supporter of the SSPX. What is your beef?
D
Denise1957
Guest
I do not see how the info that I posted regarding what Bl. Pope John Paul ll wrote in his Motu Proprio regarding his showing support for those who are attached to the Latin Liturgical traditions runs contrary to the subject of this thread. I’m trying to show that Bl. Pope John Paul ll wanted bishops and others in ministry to show support those who are attached in this way.
Did you read the Motu Proprio? It’s an amazing document, really. It was issued just days after the unlawful episcopal consecrations of June 30, 1988. In the document, the Pope admonishes, but he also shows how much he cares about those who are attached to the Latin liturgy. He did not want to lose those who are attached to the Latin liturgies, and join up with a group outside of the authority and jurisdiction of the Church. He was a good shepherd, in that he admonished, but, as a loving father and shepherd who cared for his flock, he also showed he loved those in his flock who are attached to the Latin liturgy. He did NOT want any of the sheep to stray. And he then provided the means for which the traditional Sacraments could be administered in the Church; hence the establishment of the Ecclesia Dei groups.
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
Yes, but nobody has said anything contrary to what the Pope wanted. There has not been any criticism of the Liturgical Tradition of the Church, any criticism of the EF, or the FSSP-- nothing. That is not even the subject, and there has been no debate here. It has all been very civil, except, of course, for your rudeness to Brother JR.
D
Denise1957
Guest
Br. JR is welcome to send me a PM if he has concerns about anything I’ve written. Or you can send me a PM about your concerns about what I’ve written, but I won’t discuss it further with you on the thread.
- Status