How Do Traditionalists Feel about Divine Mercy?

[gator1582]

True, but when asked the same question and you answer that some third party approves of it then, IMO, you are stating this as you believe that the third party has some authority.

When you are talking about how traditional Catholics feel about anything, stating the SSPX approval or disapproval of that topic goes a long way to say what the general feeling is. I sense some hostility to the SSPX here but you cannot deny that they are one of if not the largest group of traditional Catholics and the people who attend their chapels generally look to the official position of the Society to clarify what they trust or distrust. So in general if the society approves of something, the people who attend their chapels will approve it. The same can be said for when they disapprove something. So yes the Society is an authority to many traditional Catholics and being such looking to what they approve is a good indicator of what a large percentage of traditional Catholic will believe.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

When you are talking about how traditional Catholics feel about anything, stating the SSPX approval or disapproval of that topic goes a long way to say what the general feeling is. I sense some hostility to the SSPX here but you cannot deny that they are one of if not the largest group of traditional Catholics and the people who attend their chapels generally look to the official position of the Society to clarify what they trust or distrust. So in general if the society approves of something, the people who attend their chapels will approve it. The same can be said for when they disapprove something. So yes the Society is an authority to many traditional Catholics and being such looking to what they approve is a good indicator of what a large percentage of traditional Catholic will believe.

I don’t know how big the SSPX is outside of the internet presence.

I have yet to see an SSPX chapel or meet anyone within the SSPX.

Though I have seen an ICKSP chapel and parish as well as met members of that group.

As I said, usually when someone throws out a third party in support of something they do so as a form of authority for the stand taken. Why else name what a third party thinks of something?

Within the Catholic Church the SSPX has no illegitimate ministry. You may say this is a negative attitude on my part says this but I am doing nothing more than repeating what the holy father has said.

 

[JReducation]

When you are talking about how traditional Catholics feel about anything, stating the SSPX approval or disapproval of that topic goes a long way to say what the general feeling is. I sense some hostility to the SSPX here but you cannot deny that they are one of if not the largest group of traditional Catholics and the people who attend their chapels generally look to the official position of the Society to clarify what they trust or distrust. So in general if the society approves of something, the people who attend their chapels will approve it. The same can be said for when they disapprove something. So yes the Society is an authority to many traditional Catholics and being such looking to what they approve is a good indicator of what a large percentage of traditional Catholic will believe.

But then these Catholics, not the priests of the Society, but the laity itself are placing themselves on a very slippery slope. They’re treating the SSPX as if it were an alternate Magisterium. That is schism.

It is one thing for a group to have an opinion and another for a group to deny approval to what the Church approves. Every Catholic must approve what the Church approves. Every Catholic does not have to like it and when given the choice, people can bow out. Divine Mercy Sunday has not been made optional. Even the major religious orders HAD TO put it into their calendar.

If you go to any Benedictine,Carmelite, Dominican, Franciscan, Cistercian, Jesuit, Trinitarian or Servite house this weekend, the LOTH and the mass is the liturgy for Divine Mercy Sunday. Generally, these orders are exempt. They are free to create their own liturgical calendars.

Do they have to like it? No. Can they say that the Church is wrong to celebrate it? No. Can they opt out? No. Can they say that they don’t like it? Yes. Must they celebrate it? Absolutely. They are not their own Magisterium, no matter how big and how old they are.

By comparison to the list I gave above, the SSPX are the new kids on the block. They don’t have any more authority on this matter than the older kids on the block.

People who treat them as if they had such authority are bordering on schism.

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV

 

[floresco]

Within the Catholic Church the SSPX has no illegitimate ministry. You may say this is a negative attitude on my part says this but I am doing nothing more than repeating what the holy father has said.

The Holy Father does not repeat it and repeat it and repeat it. Also he says other things besides. You do not reflect the attitude of the Pope even if your words agree.

 

[JReducation]

The Holy Father does not repeat it and repeat it and repeat it. Also he says other things besides. You do not reflect the attitude of the Pope even if your words agree.

In fairness here, the Holy Father never deals with the laity. He’s not hearing the constant attempts on the part of some laymen to treat the SSPX as if they were in the same position as the SOLT, which is also a society of apostolic life. He does not have to repeat himself. He simply assumes that the bishops, priests, deacons, religious and catechists out here will correct such attempts as they come up. He certainly repeats it when it comes up in his presence.

Part of the situation is the way that the extremes speak about the SSPX. I have seen people say things about the SSPX that are not true.

1. They are in schism. FALSE
2. They are a cult. FALSE
3. They are heretics. FALSE
4. They are an order. FALSE
5. They have authority to teach. FALSE
6. They will come back and be blended into the mainstream. UNLIKELY
7. They have a right to disobey. FALSE
8. They can continue to celebrate the sacraments illegally, because illegal is not that bad. FALSE
9. The SSPX has parishes. FALSE
10. They have religious orders attached to them. FALSE

When these things are said, by either side, those who are know the right answer can certainly clarify the mistake.

I hope that helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[gator1582]

I don’t know how big the SSPX is outside of the internet presence.

I have yet to see an SSPX chapel or meet anyone within the SSPX.

Though I have seen an ICKSP chapel and parish as well as met members of that group.

As I said, usually when someone throws out a third party in support of something they do so as a form of authority for the stand taken. Why else name what a third party thinks of something?

Within the Catholic Church the SSPX has no illegitimate ministry. You may say this is a negative attitude on my part says this but I am doing nothing more than repeating what the holy father has said.

Where I live there are more people that attend SSPX chapels then diocesan chapels if you include independent priests that are at somewhat favorable to the SSPX it is probably 2 to 3 times the number. So maybe I am biased as to what I consider traditional because of the area I live in.

• I’m trying to determine if it is one person’s opinion or not.*

This is part of the original post.

I brought up the society because many people who call themselves traditional Catholics believe that they are an authority and look to their priests for guidance. You can call this schismatic if you want but the original poster was asking what the general view of traditional Catholics is about the Divine Mercy devotion. By pointing out what the SSPX views on the mater I was trying to give the original poster an better view about the general feel of what traditional Catholics think.

That was part of the original post. I was

 

[gator1582]

But then these Catholics, not the priests of the Society, but the laity itself are placing themselves on a very slippery slope. They’re treating the SSPX as if it were an alternate Magisterium. That is schism.

If you go to any Benedictine,Carmelite, Dominican, Franciscan, Cistercian, Jesuit, Trinitarian or Servite house this weekend, the LOTH and the mass is the liturgy for Divine Mercy Sunday. Generally, these orders are exempt. They are free to create their own liturgical calendars.

Do they have to like it? No. Can they say that the Church is wrong to celebrate it? No. Can they opt out? No. Can they say that they don’t like it? Yes. Must they celebrate it? Absolutely. They are not their own Magisterium, no matter how big and how old they are.

Br.JR, FFV

I do not want to go too off topic so I will limit myself, but as far as I know Divine Mercy Sunday has never been inserted into the 1962 Missal, so people can not celebrate it and opt out. They can also go to Eastern Rite Liturgies which, as far as I know, do not celebrate it.

I’m trying to determine if it is one person’s opinion or not

Sorry I am not to good at quoting but this is part of the original post. I am trying to help the original poster with determine if it is one person’s opinion or not. You can call people who look to the SSPX for guidance as schismatics, but they compromise a big portion of Traditional Catholics. I was trying to help TrueLight get an idea of weather or not trads are not gung-ho about Divine Mercy. I do not see why this has devolve into a “are the SSPX schismatics or not” debate which I am sure have been hashed and rehashed several time on this forum already.

 

[JReducation]

Where I live there are more people that attend SSPX chapels then diocesan chapels if you include independent priests that are at somewhat favorable to the SSPX it is probably 2 to 3 times the number.

Could you clarify for me what you mean when you say independent priest, because Canon Law does not allow for any priest or religious to be independent. All of us must be incardinated into a community or a diocese. Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV

 

[floresco]

By pointing out what the SSPX views on the mater I was trying to give the original poster an better view about the general feel of what traditional Catholics think.

I think this was clear to most people.

 

[JReducation]

I do not want to go too off topic so I will limit myself, but as far as I know Divine Mercy Sunday has never been inserted into the 1962 Missal, so people can not celebrate it and opt out. They can also go to Eastern Rite Liturgies which, as far as I know, do not celebrate it.

I’m trying to determine if it is one person’s opinion or not

Sorry I am not to good at quoting but this is part of the original post. I am trying to help the original poster with determine if it is one person’s opinion or not. You can call people who look to the SSPX for guidance as schismatics, but they compromise a big portion of Traditional Catholics. I was trying to help TrueLight get an idea of weather or not trads are not gung-ho about Divine Mercy. I do not see why this has devolve into a “are the SSPX schismatics or not” debate which I am sure have been hashed and rehashed several time on this forum already.

Maybe it’s my fault. I may have been less than clear. I’m not saying that the SSPX is schismatic. I’m saying that to use the SSPX as if it were a second Magisterium can lead to schism, not for the SSPX, but for the individual.

No one can use any other source as authoritative except the Magisterium.

I understand what you mean when you say that the SSPX is representative of how many Traditionalists feel about Divine Mercy Sunday. The issue is that the SSPX does not have a right to denounce Divine Mercy Sunday, because it was instituted by the Magisterium of John Paul II.

There are two options. Those who use the 1962 missal can follow that calendar, which does not include Divine Mercy Sunday or on this particular Sunday, flip over to the Ordinary Form.

What one cannot do is to denounce Divine Mercy Sunday. One does not have to like it, but one may not say that it’s wrong to have it. That would be placing oneself in conflict with the Magisterium. The Magisterium is the highest authority on liturgical matters.

Then I was giving an example of how we do it. We have some brothers who use the 1962 missal. However, the condition is that they must celebrate the mass according to the Franciscan Liturgical Calendar of 1970. They have to flip back and forth in the EF missal to comply. On a day like tomorrow, there is nothing to flip to, because it’s not in the EF. Those brothers who prefer the EF will not have it on Divine Mercy Sunday, because the Franciscan calendar commands the Divine Mercy Sunday.

If you have the option to skip it, you can do so. If you do not have the option to skip it, you must use the OF missal. To say anything to the contrary, because someone in the SSPX does not approve of Divine Mercy Sunday is a slippery slope.

You don’t have to celebrate it, if it’s not in the 1962 missal. But you cannot disapprove of it, because it was canonically instituted by the pope. That’s where some people step onto the slippery slope. They take it upon themselves to approve and disapprove what the Church has the right to do. When you ask them why they say that, they say that this group told them so. In that case, they’re treating that group as if it were a Magisterium. That’s not the group’s fault. That’s the individual’s fault.

I hope that I’m clearer.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[gator1582]

Could you clarify for me what you mean when you say independent priest, because Canon Law does not allow for any priest or religious to be independent. All of us must be incardinated into a community or a diocese. Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV

An independent priest is a priest who runs a parish independent of the local Bishop. Similar to the SSPX but without the group. Some priests are officially retired from the diocese and say Mass at a chapel in their house. Others form parishes similar to the SSPX but by themselves with the SSPX Bishops performing Confirmations.

I am not completely sure of the Canonical situation of a retired priest who says private Masses at his house. I know of some in my dioceses that the Bishop has no problem with ( although they use the New Missal).

For the other group, you are correct their situation is just as “irregular” as the SSPX but I still consider these people traditional Catholics and so their opinion would matter to the original poster.

 

[gator1582]

You don’t have to celebrate it, if it’s not in the 1962 missal. But you cannot disapprove of it, because it was canonically instituted by the pope. That’s where some people step onto the slippery slope. They take it upon themselves to approve and disapprove what the Church has the right to do. When you ask them why they say that, they say that this group told them so. In that case, they’re treating that group as if it were a Magisterium.

Br. JR, FFV

Feasts are commonly changed in Liturgical Calendars. Many Octaves were removed from the New Calendar some Feast Days moved from one day to another. Were the people pushing for this disobedient? Were they wrong? If they were then should we undo what they did. If not, then why is it wrong for someone to say maybe we should change the calendar back to what it was before and in particular this Feast.

I think that there exists a little more room than you give to people for differences of opinions on certain issues.

As a side note. The SSPX has the Divine Mercy prayers in their book I was talking about, so they do not denounce Divine Mercy. As far as I know, they do not celebrate it because they use the 1962 Missal which does not have the Feast.

 

[JReducation]

I don’t think that we’re talking about the same thing. Let’s break it down and see.

Feasts are commonly changed in Liturgical Calendars.

I wouldn’t say “commonly” but they have been added, deleted and moved.

Many Octaves were removed from the New Calendar some Feast Days moved from one day to another.

Yes, because the calendar was rewritten in an attempt to reduce the number liturgical calendars in the Latin Church. Around 1970, there were more than 20 different liturgical calendars. Every major order had one. Their parishes followed that one. Countries had one. The different rites in the Latin Church had their own: Mozarabic, Milan,Carmelite, Carthusian and Dominican. Then there was the Roman calendar.

Were the people pushing for this disobedient?

No one pushed for it. This was an initiative that began at the Holy See.

Were they wrong?

It does not apply, since the Holy See initiated the study and passed it on to the bishops and the major superiors of male religious to examine the proposal and give feedback. Ultimately, the Holy See made up it’s mind.

Those who needed certain feasts on the calendar, which had been removed or reduced, simply asked the CDW for permission to keep them. There was no disobedience involved, because they asked.

If they were then should we undo what they did.

Does not apply, because it was the initiative of the Holy See, not an outside group. The outsiders were asked for their (name removed by moderator)ut. We cannot undo what the Holy See does. Only the Holy See can undo what it does.

If not, then why is it wrong for someone to say maybe we should change the calendar back to what it was before and in particular this Feast.

There is nothing wrong with it. This is where we disconnected.

I’m talking about those who denounce the Solemnity of Divine Mercy saying that it’s wrong to have it at all. No one has the right to challenge the Holy See on such matters, since the Holy See is the highest liturgical authority in the Church.

One can certainly say that they don’t like this feast on this day. Where you step onto a slippery slope is when you say, “The Church is wrong for putting this feast here.” You’re passing judgment on the Church’s wisdom in an area that is out of your competency. You and I have no authority to question the Church’s wisdom outside of our area of competency and authority. There is a difference between “I don’t like” and “They’re wrong”. That’s what I’m trying to say.

I think that there exists a little more room than you give to people for differences of opinions on certain issues.

I’m comfortable with differences of opinion. I’m uncomfortable with saying that something that the Holy See has done is wrong, when the Holy See has the right to do it. The Holy See is bound only by moral and natural law.

As I said above, there is a great difference between me saying to you, "I don’t like . . . " and me saying to you “You’re wrong . …”

If you’re above me in rank, as is the case with the Holy See, one has to be very careful when one says that the Holy See is wrong.

As a side note. The SSPX has the Divine Mercy prayers in their book I was talking about, so they do not denounce Divine Mercy. As far as I know, they do not celebrate it because they use the 1962 Missal which does not have the Feast.

Not celebrating it because it’s not in the Missal is fine, if you’re allowed to take that option.

What is not fine is when some people say that Pope John Paul made a mistake because the SSPX says so.

First, I never heard the SSPX say that he was wrong.

Second, the SSPX does not have more authority than the pope.

Third, people who treat the SSPX as if it were a Magisterium are on a slippery slope. The SSPX is not on the slippery slope. The individual who would listen to the SSPX before listening to the pope is on the slippery slope.

I was not pointing the finger at the SSPX. I was warning that while we can use the SSPX as representative of what Traditionalists think, we cannot say that this is so, because the SSPX says it is. There is nothing wrong with saying, “If you want to understand Traditionalists, look at the SSPX.” That’s actually true.

Are we clearer now?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[ProVobis]

Where I live there are more people that attend SSPX chapels then diocesan chapels if you include independent priests that are at somewhat favorable to the SSPX it is probably 2 to 3 times the number. So maybe I am biased as to what I consider traditional because of the area I live in.

There’s a local “independent” EF chapel near me run by a Polish canon who has the Divine Chaplet said there quite a lot, not only on Divine Mercy Sunday. At least he used to.

 

[Allegra]

The Divine Mercy chapelet is one of my favorite devotions. I don’t know why anyone would have a problem with it unless they are literally someone who just hates anything new.

 

[Alfonsus]

For God’s sake, what John Paul II did was only:

1. Subtitle the Octave of Easter as Divine Mercy Sunday. By default it is already a solemnity. He did not delete, change, subtract anything. Everything else intact for Mass in that day. It just a new subtitle. There is no Feast of Divine Mercy, the feast is the Solemnity of Octave of Easter itself.
2. He instituted plenary indulgence for that day. Don’t say the traditionalist don’t want the subtitle but want the plenary indulgence, or worse to claim that the plenary indulgence is ineffective because John Paul II who instituted it, or because you use old calendar the indulgence is not applicable to you?
3. Anything else is part of the realm of devotion, no one obligated: chaplet, image, message, etc. John Paul II approved the devotion for the whole Church. But since devotion is not an obligation, no one is bound to take it. No problem here.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

An independent priest is a priest who runs a parish independent of the local Bishop. Similar to the SSPX but without the group.

There is no such thing as an independent priest within the Catholic Church.

All priests are incarnated into a diocese or religious institute.

Some priests are officially retired from the diocese and say Mass at a chapel in their house.

Retirement does not removed one from a diocese or religious institute.

One must have approval from the local bishop to have a chapel within his diocese.

Others form parishes similar to the SSPX but by themselves with the SSPX Bishops performing Confirmations.

To be a parish it must be under the local bishop.

I am not completely sure of the Canonical situation of a retired priest who says private Masses at his house. I know of some in my dioceses that the Bishop has no problem with ( although they use the New Missal).

Canonically they are under the bishop and have his approval for the chapel.

For the other group, you are correct their situation is just as “irregular” as the SSPX but I still consider these people traditional Catholics and so their opinion would matter to the original poster.

No so. Priests who walk away from their diocese or religious institute are not “irregular” like the SSPX. They are in a far graver circumstance.

 

[bluecake]

I had never heard of Divine Mercy Sunday until I started attending the Latin Mass after an absence of many years. Therefore it is not something which has resonated with me at all

. At Mass today, Father specifically said that the observance of the Feast was not obligatory.
One of the aspects which I found most off-putting was the very garish image which was displayed in the church today… Lurid colours seem inappropriate in a sacred context - at least, they do to my eye and I could not identify with the picture at all.

My personal view and opinion, and I appreciated the information that the observance of the Feast is optional. To me, it’s still all about Easter.

 

[JReducation]

I had never heard of Divine Mercy Sunday until I started attending the Latin Mass after an absence of many years. Therefore it is not something which has resonated with me at all

. At Mass today, Father specifically said that the observance of the Feast was not obligatory.
One of the aspects which I found most off-putting was the very garish image which was displayed in the church today… Lurid colours seem inappropriate in a sacred context - at least, they do to my eye and I could not identify with the picture at all.

My personal view and opinion, and I appreciated the information that the observance of the Feast is optional. To me, it’s still all about Easter.

“garish image”

You must have had a bad copy of it, because it’s actually very beautiful, when it’s done by a good artist. I saw the original one that Sister Faustina supervised and it’s breathtaking. Yet, it’s interesting, because she started to cry when she saw it finished. She said that it did not capture the beauty of what Jesus asked her to have painted.

Look around for a better copy. There are some beautiful ones around.

It’s not quite optional either. It depends on the Ordinary of the Dioceses and the Conference of Bishops of each country or if your parish is run by religious, the community’s ordo may require it. It’s in our ordo as mandatory. That’s why we can’t have an EF tomorrow. It’s not in the EF calendar. The ordo requires that it be celebrated. So you have to use the OF, not that we use the EF too often. But if we had wanted to do so tomorrow, it would not have been possible to celebrate the mass in the EF.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[KateKimmer]

I don’t do the divine mercy devotion.