Catholic High School near the Latin Mass

[Louis1894]

I only know about one Catholic high school that is a part of a Latin Mass community… St. John Vianney school at Maple Hill, KS. Does anyone know of other places where there is a traditional Catholic high school next to a church that has the Latin Mass? I’m only interested in those schools/churches that are in full communion with Rome.

 

[IronMIke]

Isn’t any Catholic church in full communion?

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Isn’t any Catholic church in full communion?

Sadly, IronMike, no, not every church that calls itself ‘catholic’ is in communion with Rome. Do a search of this forum on SSPX, and you will understand why.

 

[Domnall]

Hi Louis,
St. Benedict Center, a Benedictine Monastery in Harvard, Massachusetts is a community that has a Grades 1-12 school and the students attend the Tridentine Mass every morning and all boys, for example, are trained as altar servers.

I know that sentence was kinda rambing, but it’s the best I could do

Here’s a link to the school’s webpage.
school.saintbenedict.com/

Note: These are not the New Hampshire “Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.” This monastery is regularized in their diocese led by His Excellency Bishop McManus.

 

[salvete]

Lumen Christi Catholic School in Indianapolis, Indiana, attends daily mass at noon. Twice a week it is in the Extraordinary Form and 3 times a week in the Ordinary Form. They attend mass at Holy Rosary Catholic Church in Indianapolis. It is a faithfully Catholic school from kindergarten to high school. Here is the website and you can watch a short video about the school as well. lumenchristischool.org/about.html

 

[Louis1894]

Thanks for the responses. I don’t have a family yet but when I do it would be nice if I could live near a traditional Catholic high school preferably one with the Latin Mass because I love it so much.

 

[T_More]

Sadly, IronMike, no, not every church that calls itself ‘catholic’ is in communion with Rome. Do a search of this forum on SSPX, and you will understand why.

IronMike, the phrase about “full communion” can be misleading around here, when what is really meant is a “regularized canonical situation”. The SSPX have not introduced any theological novelties, or put any bizarre spins on Church doctrine, but have only sought to adhere to the faith as taught through the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church for two thousand years. The sacraments administered by them are valid, but the sacrament of reconciliation is considered by some interpreters of canon law as illicit. The bottom line is there is nothing they teach that is opposed to the constant Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church in any way shape or form. And no, I am not an SSPX parishoner. I attend the TLM regularly at a parish in my diocese as well as at an FSSP parish.

To answer the OP question, and I don’t know if this counts, but my daughter attends a K-12 school that serves the Tridentine Mass one Friday a month to the students. The other Fridays are the Ordinary Form/NO. The school is not attached to any parish.

 

[1AugustSon7]

The SSPX have not introduced any theological novelties

Highly debatable.

Things like ecumenism (especially Christian ecumenism), religious liberty, liturgical reform, and the like are (when properly understood) perfectly orthodox practices and in keeping with Catholic doctrine and tradition. When people oppose these, they sometimes go overboard and contest the orthodoxy or orthodpraxis of these things and, in the process, fall afoul of Catholic doctrine/belief or practise. I’ve seen this a lot in SSPX literature though more among lay partisans than from official organs. At other times, of course, it is right to decry abuses and report them to the proper authorities when they are correctly identified; however, it is not right to oppose the Magisterium in her teaching or lawful government/authority. Catholics have always practiced change (reform, especially moral) from within and by personal example: e.g., St. Francis of Assisi.

The SSPX policy of “recognise and resist” is certainly a theological novelty, especially in how they apply or practice it, which is unprecedented -at least as far as I know- in Church history.

 

[T_More]

The SSPX policy of “recognise and resist” is certainly a theological novelty, especially in how they apply or practice it, which is unprecedented -at least as far as I know- in Church history.

How about St. Paul and St. Peter and the issue of the Gentiles?

“There being an imminent danger for the Faith, Prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects. Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith. And, as the Glosa of St. Augustine puts it (Ad Galatas 2, 14), ‘St. Peter himself gave the example to those who govern so that if sometimes they stray from the right way, they will not reject a correction as unworthy even if it comes from their subjects.”

Referring to the same episode, in which St. Paul resisted St. Peter “to his face,” St. Thomas teaches: “The reprehension was just and useful, and the reason for it was not trivial: there was a danger for the preservation of evangelical truth… The way it took place was appropriate, since it was public and open. For this reason, St. Paul writes: ‘I spoke to Cephas,’ that is, Peter, ‘before everyone,’ since the simulation practiced by St. Peter was fraught with danger to everyone.”

The Angelic Doctor also shows how this passage of the Scriptures contains teachings not only for Hierarchs, but for the faithful as well: “To the Prelates [was given an example] of humility so that they do not refuse to accept reprehensions from their inferiors and subjects; and to the subjects, an example of zeal and liberty so they will not fear to correct their Prelates, above all when the crime is public and entails a danger for many.”

How about Athanasius? Over 80% of the Church became Arian, he was excommunicated by Pope Liberius, sne tinto exile 5 times, and eventually became one of our greatest saints and doctors of the Church. His Creed is what our Nicene Creed is based on. And BTW, Pope Liberius was the first pope not to appear in the Roman Martyrology, and thus the first to not be a declared a saint.

I can start another thread if you’d like and show you dozens of other examples troughout the history of the Church, so no, it is not a “novelty”.

 

[1AugustSon7]

How about St. Paul and St. Peter and the issue of the Gentiles?

Not the same; Abp. Lefebvre is not Saint Paul, nor did he claim to receive a direct commission from God approbating his work or mission.

"There being an imminent danger for the Faith, Prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects.

Their subjects. As the SSPX practices this, they cannot be called subjects of the Roman Pontiff: they pick-and-choose what they will believe or practice.

Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith. And, as the Glosa of St. Augustine puts it (Ad Galatas 2, 14), ‘St. Peter himself gave the example to those who govern so that if sometimes they stray from the right way, they will not reject a correction as unworthy even if it comes from their subjects."

Rome, for her part, is doing this: the Popes have literally gone out of their way to hear the grievances and concerns of the Society and its leaders or representatives.

As for the rest of what you provided, in no instance ever did the example of Sts. Peter and Paul suffice to justify a schism or schismatical act.

Furthermore, what “evangelical truth” is supposed to be in jeopardy?

 

[T_More]

As for the rest of what you provided, in no instance ever did the example of Sts. Peter and Paul suffice to justify a schism or schismatical act.

Furthermore, what “evangelical truth” is supposed to be in jeopardy?

Are you suggesting that the SSPX are schismatics? The holy father, as far I can tell, has never declared such, so saying that or implying such would be calumny.

From my research, this is what the SSPX has brought to Rome’s attention that have appeared to been novelties put forth by the Second Vatican Council:

“All men are called to this Catholic unity which prefigures and promotes universal peace, and in different ways belong to it, or are related to it: The Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation.” Lumen Gentium

**"It is an error in a matter of divine truth to imagine the Church as invisible, by which many Christian communities, although they differ from each other in theirfaith, are united by a bond that is invisible to the senses. Pope Pius XII

“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all can be saved.” Lateran Council IV Pope Innocent III

“Faith in Christ cannot be maintained pure and unalloyed when it is not protected and supported by faith in the Church. Faith in Christ and faith in the Church stand together. If any man does not enter the Church, or if any man departs from her, he is far from the hope of life and salvation.” Pope Pius XI

“Heretics and schismatics are excluded from the Church because they have separated from her and belong to her only as deserters belong to the army from which they have deserted.” Catechism of Trent **

*“These Christians are indeed in some real way joined to us in the Holy Spirit for, by His gifts and graces, His sanctifying power is also active in them, and He has strengthened some of them even to the shedding of their blood.” Lumen Gentium *

**“The Catholic Church alone is the Body of Christ, of which He is Head and Savior. We must always remember the unity of the Mystical Body outside which there is no salvation; for their is no entering into salvation outside the Church. Truth, grace, the Sacraments: all the certain norms for our journey to God come from the Church. The Catholic Church is the extension of Jesus Christ in time and space. Outside this Body the Holy Spirit does not give life to anyone. Those who are enemies ot unity do not participate in the charity of divine life; those outside the Church do not possess the Holy Spirit. A Christian must fear nothing so much as to be separated from the Body of Christ. If he is separated from Christ’s Body, he is not one of His members; he is not fed by His Spirit.” Pope Paul VI

“If those unwilling to be at agreement in the Church be slain outside the Church, they cannot attain to the rewards fo the Church.” Pope Pelagius II

“No one, even if he pour out his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved unless he remain within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” Council of Florence, Pope Eugene IV **

*“The Moslems together with us adore the one merciful God.” Lumen Gentium *

**“The Holy Catholic Church teaches that God cannot truly be adored except within its fold.” Pope St. Gregory the Great

“The Catholic Church alone preserves true worship.” Pope Pius XI

“A true worshipper is one whose mind has not been defiled with any false belief.” Pope St. Leo the Great **

No man can worship the one true God “together with us” if they do not share our one true faith. Islam teaches that Jesus is not God and that there is only one person in God; hence, they do not believe in the God we worship. Thus, they can in no way worship “with us” our God. A man cannot worship in any way that which he does not believe in, for the Law of Praying is the Law of Believing, and vice-versa. If they believe in a one-person deity, THAT is what they worship, and in no way “with us” can they worship the Holy Trinity, the Second Person of Which is a human being like us in all things but sin.

*“Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or of His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do His will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience, those too may achieve eternal salvation.” Lumen Gentium *

**“The saving grace of this religion, the only true religion, through which alone true salvation is truly promised, has never been refused to anyone who was worthy of it; and whoever did lack it was unworthy of it. Consequently, those who have not heard the Gospel, and those who, having heard it have not persevered; and those who, having heard it, have refused to come to Christ; that is, to believe in Him; ALL these have perished in death: the all go in a single lump to condemnation.” St. Augustine

“It is error to believe that there is a natural justice whereby eternal life is promised for good works without any further qualification.” Pope St. Pius V

“Acts which spring from natural goodness have only the appearance of virtue; they cannot last of themselves nor can they merit salvation.” Pope St. Pius X

“He who is separated from the Body of the Catholic Church, however praiseworthy his conduct may seem otherwise, will never enjoy eternal life.” Council of Cirta**

…more to follow…

 

[T_More]

All who have been justified by Faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ: they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church. Decree on Ecumenism, “Unitatis Redintegratio,” Nov. 21, 1964

**Who is to be called a Christian? He who confesses the doctrine of Jesus Christ IN HIS CHURCH. Hence, he who is truly a Christian thoroughly detests all cults and sects found OUTSIDE the doctrine and OUTSIDE the Church of Christ, everywhere and among all peoples, as for example the Jewish, the Mohammedan, and the heretical cults and sects [of Protestants]. St. Peter Canisius, SJ, Doctor of the Church

Christianity is incarnate in the Catholic Church; it is IDENTIFIED with that perfect and spiritual society which has the Roman Pontiff for its visible head. Pope Leo XIII

We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff. Pope Boniface VIII

No one is our brother unless he has the same Father we do. St. Jerome, Father and Doctor of the Church

In NO way can men be counted among the children of God unless they take the Church for their Mother. Pope Leo XIII

No one can have God for his Father if he does not have the Church for his Mother. One cannot love Christ without loving the Church which Christ loves. The spirit of the Church is the spirit of Christ, and to the extent to which one loves the Church of Christ does he possess the Holy Spirit. Pope John Paul II**

*The life of grace, faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church. Decree on Ecumenism, “Unitatis Redintegratio,” Nov. 21, 1964 *

**As Christ is the head of the Church, so is the Holy Ghost her soul. ONLY those are really to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and who profess the true Faith and who have not unhappily withdrawn from the Body or, for grave reasons, been excluded by legitimate authority. It follows that those who are divided in faith or in government cannot be living in one Body such as this, and cannot be living the life of its one Divine Spirit. Pius XII

Outside this Body, the Holy Spirit gives life to NO ONE; those outside the Church do not possess the Holy Spirit. The Catholic Church alone is the Body of Christ, and if a man be separated from the Body of Christ he is not one of His members nor is he fed by His Spirit. Pope Paul VI

If a member be cut off … his life is lost. The Spirit does not follow the amputated member … Outside the Church you can find everything except salvation: you can have dignities, Sacraments, the Gospels, the faith - and preach it, too! - but never can you find salvation except in the Catholic Church. St. Augustine **

*The brethren divided from us also carry out many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These actions most certainly can truly engender a life of grace and, one must say, can aptly give access to the communion of salvation. Decree on Ecumenism, “Unitatis Redintegratio,” Nov. 21, 1964 *

**By means of religious Indifferentism, crafty men deceitfully pretend that people can attain eternal salvation in the practice of any religion, as though there could be any fellowship of light with darkness. These men conclude that not only sons of the Church but also others, however estranged they may remain from Catholic unity, are equally on the road to salvation and are able to achieve everlasting life. Words fail Us from utter HORROR in detesting and abhorring this new and terrible insult! Ven. Pope Pius IX

The Church alone has the legitimate worship of sacrifice and the salutary use of the Sacraments. Hence, to possess true holiness, we must belong to her and embrace her, like those who entered the Ark to escape perishing in the Flood. Catechism of Trent

The Holy Catholic Church teaches that God cannot be adored except within her fold; she affirms that all those who are separated from her will not be saved. Pope St. Gregory the Great.

No one is as far from the Pasch of the Lord as heretics. They can have no part with Him who are enemies of this saving Mystery. For they deny the Gospel and contradict the Creed, and they cannot celebrate the Paschal Feast with us. And though they dare to claim the name of “Christian,” nevertheless every creature whose Head is Christ scorns them. Pope St. Leo the Great **

*In certain circumstances, it is allowable, indeed desirable, that Catholics join in prayer with their separated brethren. Decree on Ecumenism, “Unitatis Redintegratio,” Nov. 21, 1964 *

**No one must either pray nor sing psalms with heretics, and whosoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the communion of the Church, whether clergy or layman: Let him be excommunicated. Council of Carthage (Regional)

If any clergyman or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or to the meetings of heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of Communion. III Council of Constantinople (Ecumenical)

That the faithful and clergy should pray for Christian unity under the leadership of heretics can in no way be tolerated. Ven. Pope Pius IX

Is it permitted for Catholics to be present at, or take part in, conventions, gatherings, meetings, or societies of non-Catholics which aim to associate together under a single agreement all who in any way lay claim to the name of Christian? In the negative! It is clear, therefore, why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics. There is only one way in which the unity of Christians may be fostered, and that is by furthering the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from her. Pope Pius XI **

…more to follow…

 

[T_More]

*It is through his conscience that man sees and recognizes the demands of the Divine Law. He is bound to follow this conscience faithfully in all his activity so that he may come to God. Therefore, he must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience, nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience. Declaration on Religious Freedom, “Dignitatis Humanae,” December 12, 1965 *

**That it is right for each individual to follow with tranquil soul what is acceptable to his own religious creed makes the divine establishment of the Church of no consequence. The true Church of Jesus Christ was established by divine authority and is known by a four-fold Mark which must be believed. No other Church is Catholic except the one founded on Peter and on his successors in the Chair of Rome. Especially fatal to the salvation of souls is that erroneous opinion of Liberty of Conscience and Liberty of Worship is the proper right of every man. By Our Apostolic authority, we reject, proscribe, and condmen this evil opinion. Ven. Pope Pius IX **

*Religious communities have the right not to be prevented from publicly teaching and bearing witness to their beliefs by the spoken or written word. Declaration on Religious Freedom, “Dignitatis Humanae,” December 12, 1965 *

**The accursed perversity of heretics has so increased that now they exercise their wickedness not in secret but manifest their error publicly, and win over the simple and weak to their opinion. For this reason, We resolve to cast them, their defenders, and their receivers under anathema, and We forbid under anathema that anyone presume to help heretics or to do business with them. III Lateran Council (Ecumenical)

It is insanity to believe that Freedom of Conscience and Freedom of Worship are the inalienable rights of every citizen. From this foul-smelling fountain of Indifferentism flows the erroneous and absurd opinion – or, rather, MADNESS – that freedom of conscience must be asserted and vindicated for everyone. This most pestilential error opens the door to the complete and immoderate liberty of opinions which works such widespread harm both in Church and State. Pope Gregory XVI **

*The human person is to be guided by his own judgment and to enjoy freedom. Declaration on Religious Freedom, “Dignitatis Humanae,” December 12, 1965 *

**By the fact that freedom of all forms of worship is proclaimed, truth is confused with error, and the Holy and Immaculate Spouse of Christ, outside which there is no salvation, is placed on the same level with heretical sects and even with Jewish perfidy. Pope Pius VII

That every man is free to embrace and to profess whatever religion his reason approves of is hereby condemned as ERROR. Ven. Pope Pius IX

What more deadly evil could there be for a soul than freedom to be in error? Pope Leo XIII

If a person wants to save his soul, all he has to do is examine his conscience against the everlasting teachings of the Church. Outside this true Catholic Faith, no one can be saved, SO HELP ME GOD! Pope John XXIII **

And there are many others I can show. So you can see why the SSPX are following their consciences and asking for “clarification” as there appears to be some depatures from the Tradition of the Church. Unfortunately, all the Church has responded with is that the documents must be accepted across the board with no exceptions and instructing the SSPX to read the documents through the lense of tradition (or through the “hermeneutic of continuity”), which as you can see from the constant teachings from the Church shown above, simply can’t be done and presents the problem in the first place. A sad business…

 

[anp1215]

Hi Louis,
St. Benedict Center, a Benedictine Monastery in Harvard, Massachusetts is a community that has a Grades 1-12 school and the students attend the Tridentine Mass every morning and all boys, for example, are trained as altar servers.

I know that sentence was kinda rambing, but it’s the best I could do

Here’s a link to the school’s webpage.
school.saintbenedict.com/

Note: These are not the New Hampshire “Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.” This monastery is regularized in their diocese led by His Excellency Bishop McManus.

Are there two “Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary?”
Because the school’s website says “Immaculate Heart of Mary School is an apostolate of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”

 

[1AugustSon7]

Are you suggesting that the SSPX are schismatics? The holy father, as far I can tell, has never declared such, so saying that or implying such would be calumny.

Anytime there is an aversion to giving Communion to Catholics or participating in the Eucharist with other Catholics there is danger of schism. It is hardly unheard of for SSPX representatives or their partisans to effectively say it is illicit to receive Communion from non-SSPX clergy, especially those who exclusively make use of the OF. I have read plenty of SSPX literature that tells people not to attend the OF: this may not be schism per se but it is certainly the conditions that tend to prevail before a formal schism does occur.

From my research, this is what the SSPX has brought to Rome’s attention that have appeared to been novelties put forth by the Second Vatican Council:

Appears is the key word. I believe it was the Council of Nicea that introduced the utter novelty of employing philosophical terminology to defend the Faith; a novelty that many Protestant communities think illegitimate (because they think all Greek philosophy is effectively non-Christian or uninspired or whatever).

Just about anything can be interpreted in an erroneous sense, depending, for instance, on the education or background of the person reading or interpreting a document (e.g., of Vatican II); even the most precise formulas can be misunderstood. The Catholic thing to do, however, is to ultimately entrust the understanding and interpretation of these things to the competent (and issuing) authority: i.e., the Church’s Magisterium.

There is, for instance, nothing at all unorthodox about declaring civil authorities incompetent as such in matters of religion: the State does not have the right or the competence to interpret or determine matters of religion: it is outside political prudence and can only be perverted by political prudence which, in other instances, is notwithstanding perfectly good or legitimate. The State never had the right or authority to determine or even establish a religion upon its subjects: this authority, insofar as a State might have had it, was absolutely dependent upon the Church, which alone enjoys a charism that grants it competency in such matters.

I can assure you that one doctrine Antichrist will not like is the Catholic one declaring States incompetent in matters of religion: this proscribes persecutions and coerced conversions to any religion. Further, it is never a legitimate conversion when someone converts owing to persecution or coercion if that is the sole reason for their supposed conversion; indeed, it approaches sacrilege in the context of Baptism.

 

[1AugustSon7]

“All men are called to this Catholic unity which prefigures and promotes universal peace, and in different ways belong to it, or are related to it: The Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God’s grace to salvation.” Lumen Gentium

"It is an error in a matter of divine truth to imagine the Church as invisible, by which many Christian communities, although they differ from each other in theirfaith, are united by a bond that is invisible to the senses. Pope Pius XII

This is exactly what I am talking about.

All men are called to Catholic unity: all men are called by God to live in peace and justice, to seek it and to work toward it, and this is not conditional upon one’s religion: it is a universal vocation of mankind as such. It’s not as if only Catholics are obliged by God to live in peace and justice with his fellow-man; nor does foresaking Catholicism mean a man is no longer bound in justice to, for example, live in peace with his fellow man. The text you cited from Vatican II has nothing to do with the invisible-Church controversy, nor is Vatican II here claiming that the Church is an invisible society. The Church has always worked with non-believers in pursuit of peace and justice or the relief of the poor or any number of others things, just as She (the Church) seeks peace, justice and relief for all people regardless of whether or not they even happen to be Catholic. The Church knows full well that times of war and rampant injustice (social or economical) vitiate man’s ability to pursue truth and find God and ultimately convert; consequently, insomuch as She desires the conversion of all men, she actively works that there exist certain basic conditions of peace and justice for and among all men, because this is congruent with man’s salvation. Indeed, when these things are deprived man tends to fall into a far worse state that can approach bestiality, which makes it difficult if not almost humanly impossible to move him to a consideration of things divine, especially if his whole life has been drowned in constantly witnessing scandal after scandal.

Finally, a unity facilitated, for instance, by a common commitment to improving society can scarcely be called a unity that is “invisible to the senses.” That’s a real unity though, to be sure, a limited one (restricted to its scope: e.g., helping the poor). Still, it is a visible, though limited, unity.

You then proceed to cite texts having to do with the Church as a visible Body; however, this first text you cited from Vatican II does not even belong to this category, though you seem to think that it did.

As the Catechism of Trent you cited itself was obliged to state, there does remain some sort of connection even between heretics and the Church, insomuch as they once belonged to her completely but have now fled that Church; moreover, they (heretics) do not cease to enjoy the indellible mark of Baptism. Moreover, we know that it does not become impossible for them to have an interior conversion back to Christ that even the non-baptized can receive or enjoy via their desire for it.

There are distinctions between, for instance, the Soul of the Church and the Body of the Church. One does not necessarily need to be a visible member of the Body of the Church to receive the grace of baptism, for instance; as people can acquire this by desire. We know that even heretics can validly baptize, and this creates a problem for many, because clearly God’s grace is working efficaciously outside the visible confines of the Church in such instances; God does not refuse to use such occassions to dispense His Grace(s).

These issues are extremely difficult and complicated and hardly one in one-thousand Catholics are competent enough in theology or ecclesiology to even give what amounts to an educated guess. Popularizing these controversies, difficulties or questions can only create more confusion and controversy; very few people even here are competent in basic philosophy or even logic, let alone have ascended to the heights of scholastic theology;- and that’s no insult because it is admittedly most difficult and requires a lot of work, study and especially patience.

Notwithstanding, most Catholics do have a sense -and always have- that anyone who does not make oneself an obstacle to their own salvation can ultimately, at least possibly, be saved by God’s grace: what is fundamental is a willingness on their part to co-operate with that grace.

Furthermore, we know for a fact that the Apostles were in the habit of actively seeking out good things in the beliefs and religions of others in order to use these things as evidence toward the Catholic truth: i.e., they sought common ground from and in acknowledged authorities, e.g., pagan poets for Saint Paul.

Finally, most Catholics believe that anyone who sincerely seeks to do what is right and good can confidently hope for God’s grace or aid even if they are not yet baptized or Catholic; therefore, anything good or legitimate found in their cultures or religions can be helpful to that end and are certainly preferable to sophistic and malicious lies and errors that frustrate such a goal or will. Saint Thomas taught clearly that the human mind is capable of coming to know the truth, and that man can avoid sin at least for a time by his own will and effort, though ultimately without God’s grace he would inevitably fall into sin. This applies to everyone and not just Catholics. So human beings as such can come to know by their own efforts at least some truth and can, again by their own active will and desire, even avoid sin or sinning; however, the Catholic truth is that these things are virtually impossible to accomplish without ultimate recourse to Divine aid, such as Revelation and God’s gratuitous Grace.

 

[1AugustSon7]

*“The Moslems together with us adore the one merciful God.” Lumen Gentium *

**“The Holy Catholic Church teaches that God cannot truly be adored except within its fold.” Pope St. Gregory the Great

“The Catholic Church alone preserves true worship.” Pope Pius XI

“A true worshipper is one whose mind has not been defiled with any false belief.” Pope St. Leo the Great **

Here is another instance of what is an apparent contradiction.

There is a difference between intention and the exterior result; an intention can be good, but its result or expression may not be right, and vice-versa. This is an old difficulty; let’s see what Saint Augustine said about it in the 5th century A.D:

For when God had made a distinction between their [Abel and Cain’s] sacrifices, neglecting Cain’s, regarding Abel’s, which was doubtless intimated by some visible sign to that effect; and when God had done so because the works of the one were evil but those of his brother good, Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. For thus it is written: “And the Lord said unto Cain, Why are you angry, and why is your countenance fallen? If you offer rightly, but do not rightly distinguish, have you not sinned? Fret not yourself, for unto you shall be his turning, and you shall rule over him.” Genesis 4:6-7 In this admonition administered by God to Cain, that clause indeed, “If you offer rightly, but do not rightly distinguish, have you not sinned?” is obscure, inasmuch as it is not apparent for what reason or purpose it was spoken, and many meanings have been put upon it, as each one who discusses it attempts to interpret it according to the rule of faith. The truth is, that a sacrifice is “rightly offered” when it is offered to the true God, to whom alone we must sacrifice. And it is “not rightly distinguished” when we do not rightly distinguish the places or seasons or materials of the offering, or the person offering, or the person to whom it is presented, or those to whom it is distributed for food after the oblation. Distinguishing is here used for discriminating—whether when an offering is made in a place where it ought not or of a material which ought to be offered not there but elsewhere; or when an offering is made at a wrong time, or of a material suitable not then but at some other time; or when that is offered which in no place nor any time ought to be offered; or when a man keeps to himself choicer specimens of the same kind than he offers to God; or when he or any other who may not lawfully partake profanely eats of the oblation. *In which of these particulars ***Cain displeased God, it is difficult to determine. But the Apostle John, speaking of these brothers, says, “Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.” 1 John 3:12 He thus gives us to understand that God did not respect his offering because it was not rightly “distinguished” in this, that he gave to God something of his own but kept himself to himself. For this all do who follow not God’s will but their own, who live not with an upright but a crooked heart, and yet offer to God such gifts as they suppose will procure from Him that He aid them not by healing but by gratifying their evil passions.

Now this is a long selection but I needed the whole of it to demonstrate an important point: Notice that between Abel and Cain the difference in their offering was rather subtle that made the one good and the other unacceptable; both Abel and Cain were i) right to offer, and ii) they offered further to the correct God (the one true God); however, the other differences proved to be ultimately problematic for Cain. Cain, therefore, did certain things rightly, but other things he did not do rightly; it is, therefore, quite possible that in worship we can distinguish between what is right and acceptable in some cases and what needs replacement or improvement in others. Determining this is not always easy (as even Saint Augustine struggles to show), because it has alot to do even with private or personal intention; but other things that can be judged externally can be either approved or deplored.

From this we can deduce that a man can certainly do the right thing by offering firstly, and further by offering to the right or true God; however, there are other considerations also that make a sacrifice finally acceptable. The important thing, however, is that man is able to do this to varying degrees, as it were, of success or acceptableness.

The point being that even God will discern the intentions, desires or acts of men in worship; not as a mere lump sum, but as it were like a careful gardener nourishing and encouraging the good and removing or reprobating the bad: in this interior intentions and exterior things (what is used or offered in worship) or acts all come into play.

So you see that the SSPX’s interpretation of these texts you cited and I quoted seem to aim at a simplicity that has no basis in Catholic teaching or tradition: it’s not that clear-cut. And there are possibilities for exceptions based, e.g., on changing circumstances or even intentions of individuals. It’s not so simple and very few of us are competent enough in the subject matter to judge; the Church, however, alone is qualified to do so and alone has a charism protecting her worship, doctrine and judgement.

In a world increasingly becoming secularist and even atheistic, it certainly seems prudent to acnowledge as good and right the judgement that God is to be worshipped and praised, when so many do not even believe it is important (let alone necessary) to acknowledge His existence, to make offerings to God; to give Him thanks for blessings received, etc.

 

[T_More]

This is exactly what I am talking about.

Aquinas did not teach man can avoid sinning by his own will and effort,

(ST I-II, 109, 8) “But in the state of corrupt nature man needs grace to heal his nature in order that he may entirely abstain from sin. And in the present life this healing is wrought in the mind–the carnal appetite being not yet restored. Hence the Apostle (Romans 7:25) says in the person of one who is restored: “I myself, with the mind, serve the law of God, but with the flesh, the law of sin.” And in this state man can abstain from all mortal sin, which takes its stand in his reason, as stated above (Question 74, Article 5); but man cannot abstain from all venial sin on account of the corruption of his lower appetite of sensuality. For man can, indeed, repress each of its movements (and hence they are sinful and voluntary), but not all, because whilst he is resisting one, another may arise, and also because the reason is always alert to avoid these movements, as was said above (74, 3, ad 2).”

Man always needs God’s help to do any good, and only through His aid can the good be accomplished,

Council of Orange

193 Can. 20.“That without God man can do no good. God does many good things in man, which man does not do; indeed man can do no good that God does not expect that man do” [St. Prosper].*

195 Can. 22. “Those things which are peculiar to men. No one has anything of his own except lying and sin. But if man has any truth and justice, it is from that fountain for which we ought to thirst in this desert, that bedewed by some drops of water from it, we may not falter on the way” [St. Prosper].*

196 Can. 23. “The good will of God and of man. Men do their own will, not God’s, when they do what displeases God; but when they do what they wish, in order to serve the divine will, even though willingly they do what they do, nevertheless it is the will of Him by whom what they will is both prepared and ordered” [St. Prosper]. *

We are not Semi-Pelagians, man in his own will and effort accomplishes only evil and sin.

And it is not the recourse to the Divine aid that makes those things possible, this is ignoring the pervious causal members of series in the operations of grace. It is simply His will that makes those things possible in us without presupposing any foreseen merits, consent or desire of aid since He moves both prevenient and subsequent grace in us. And the only reason to perpetuate the operation of sanctification is to add unto the Church as St. Augustine said,

“All graces given to those outside the Church are given them for the purpose of bringing them inside the Church.’’

And Sacred Scripture, Acts 2:46-47

“And continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they took their meat with gladness and simplicity of heart; Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord increased daily together such as should be saved.”

 

[T_More]

There is, for instance, nothing at all unorthodox about declaring civil authorities incompetent as such in matters of religion: the State does not have the right or the competence to interpret or determine matters of religion: it is outside political prudence and can only be perverted by political prudence which, in other instances, is notwithstanding perfectly good or legitimate. The State never had the right or authority to determine or even establish a religion upon its subjects: this authority, insofar as a State might have had it, was absolutely dependent upon the Church, which alone enjoys a charism that grants it competency in such matters.

So when Dignitatis Humanæ states:

1. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

Who is to enforce “within due limits” when everyone, “individuals or of social groups and of any human power”, has been suppressed by the very same declaration to enforce anything on the individual? When a person goes beyond this limit, who is to stop him or her? Also, by the very fact alone we have laws against murder is a violation to this declaration since there are religions that require human sacrifice in order to operate. Do we abolish that law since it impedes people from practicing their religious freedom? Another fact is that, who is to determine these limits? In order to establish these limits and enforce them would contradict your idea of limited State authority. But since the only religion that truly exists is the Catholic Faith, which alone enjoys the definition and defense of the word “religion”, all other false religions are nothing more then matters of men, since they are creations of them or of devils, which the State has full authority over to eliminate or suppress.

 

[jilly4ski]

Take it somewhere else T More, needless to say that SSPX is not in full communion with the Church (as evidenced by the ‘talks’). Thus the OP is not interested.

Back to our regularly scheduled thread. OP there is Saint Agnes in Saint Paul MN, where the students attend both a Latin OF and an EF during the school week. They got on the 50 top Catholic Schools stagnesschools.org/se3bin/clientschool.cgi?schoolname=school117.

The Church Saint Agnes, has a wonderful tradition of liturgical music (a chant schola, a choir singing poliphany, and a choir singing the great Mass choral works of the 18th and 19th centuries). They have a High Mass every Sunday, with an EF on the 1st, 3rd, and 5th Sundays of the month.