If no TLM, is it sinning to not attend NO mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter falcogreg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stevusmagnus said:
The advice given is fully within the Canon Law of the Church, as I pointed out and is therefore not disobeying the Church. The Church, through Canon law, makes allowance for conscience and spiritual advantage. It is no more dangerous than recommending one stay away from “fully approved” and allowed diocesan Masses said by Arian priests in the 4th century.
Click to expand...
In no way does Canon Law provide for the skipping of an OF Mass when there is no EF Mass available.

If it does, please provide the exact canons that state this.
 
I’m interested to hear about your son’s impressions of the OF mass and the EF. Was he raised with the EF?

I ask because I have 4 sons who have been raised going to the OF (same church I went to growing up). I will be going to my first TLM soon. When I mention it to them they give me a weird look and say they will try it but they like to know what’s going on (english).

Maybe you could answer my question in another thread.

God Bless,
Teresa
 
falcogreg said:
BTW, to me altar girls, EM’s, communions in the hand are NOT dogma. Why they are universally practiced is beyond my comprehension. To me, these are abuses as well.
Click to expand...
But you are incorrect. Altar girls, Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, and receiving communion in the hand are all valid allowed practices. Having only altar boys or kneeling to receiving on the tongue are not dogma either. They are practices of the church just as the others are. Since they are valid, licit options they are not abuses. If what you were so concerned about was perhaps an altar girl or other parishioners receiving in the hand, than you really are “being more holy than the pope”. You should have attended Mass and made a spiritual communion from your place in the pews. That would have fulfilled your Sunday obligation and kept you away from the EMHC also.
 
falcogreg said:
BTW, to me altar girls, EM’s, communions in the hand are NOT dogma. Why they are universally practiced is beyond my comprehension. To me, these are abuses as well.
Click to expand...
They are abuses and were condemned practices before 1969. The indult for communion in the hand came from disobedience. The practice was forbidden and disobedient Bishops and priests were doing it anyway, without Vatican permission. The Vatican eventually relented and gave the indult instead of disciplining the offenders.
 
Sr_Sally said:
But you are incorrect. Altar girls, Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, and receiving communion in the hand are all valid allowed practices. Having only altar boys or kneeling to receiving on the tongue are not dogma either. They are practices of the church just as the others are. Since they are valid, licit options they are not abuses. If what you were so concerned about was perhaps an altar girl or other parishioners receiving in the hand, than you really are “being more holy than the pope”. You should have attended Mass and made a spiritual communion from your place in the pews. That would have fulfilled your Sunday obligation and kept you away from the EMHC also.
Click to expand...
But how often are these options abused? The Church still prefers male servers because traditionally the position of altar server was to introduce young men to the priesthood. A perfect example would the be the Pope’s liturgies. Female servers are never used. If a priest can have all male servers than that would be best. Extraordinary ministers of Communion are exactly that, extraordinary. Yet, many parishes use them for daily Masses with 20 people in attendance. This is technically an abuse. And obviously our Holy Father prefers the practice of receiving communion on the tongue as he will not allow those who receive from him to receive in the hand. Also, a liturgist close to the Holy Father just gave an interview stating that communion in the hand has led to a lack of reverence towards our Eucharistic Lord. In fact we know that communion in the hand came about out of disobedience. Despite appeals from Rome, bishops continued to allow the faithful to receive in the hand and eventually Rome caved and allowed it as an option.
 
RyanML said:
But how often are these options abused? The Church still prefers male servers because traditionally the position of altar server was to introduce young men to the priesthood. A perfect example would the be the Pope’s liturgies. Female servers are never used. If a priest can have all male servers than that would be best. Extraordinary ministers of Communion are exactly that, extraordinary. Yet, many parishes use them for daily Masses with 20 people in attendance. This is technically an abuse. And obviously our Holy Father prefers the practice of receiving communion on the tongue as he will not allow those who receive from him to receive in the hand. Also, a liturgist close to the Holy Father just gave an interview stating that communion in the hand has led to a lack of reverence towards our Eucharistic Lord. In fact we know that communion in the hand came about out of disobedience. Despite appeals from Rome, bishops continued to allow the faithful to receive in the hand and eventually Rome caved and allowed it as an option.
Click to expand...
Despite the overuse of EHMC’s, despite what the liturgist has opined, despite what people may think about female altar servers, despite what some may opine about how Rome “caved in”, these things ARE permitted, and they are not “abuses”, and NOT a reason to miss Mass. If I were in a place where the only Mass offered was an EF, and I did not like the EF, I would attend it anyway because it is my duty as a Catholic to go to Mass on Sunday. The worship of God in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is what is important here, not my feelings or preference or comfort level. Obedience to God and the legitimate teaching authority He has established in the Church is what is important. We are ONE, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, not two. We had better act like it, and support each other in Christ. Because the enemy loves nothing better than division in the Church. He loves to weaken the Body of Christ and we’ve seen the results of his work before. We’ve got to get over the EF vs. OF mentality on both sides, or the result is another schism, and that is what the Pope is trying to say when he states that Catholics must accept both forms as equally valid. He well knows the dangers of saying one form is “better” than the other. He’s seen it.
 
falcogreg said:
The real sin is why we can’t have this mass more available and why I must subject myself and my family to such offenses and abuses in order to avoid sinning. Something is wrong with this equation.
Click to expand...
I have struggled often with this myself, and have come to peace with it (after about 10 years of struggle - this of course is not to say it doesn’t still bother me). What you should try to do if you cannot find a TLM (or other Eastern Rite if that is preferable for you than the Ordinary Form (NO)), is fulfill your your obligation at the Ordinary Form, in accordance with Canon Law. Try and go with an open mind, with charity. Focus on the fact that no matter what abuses may or may not occur, so long as a valid priest validly confects the Eucharist, Jesus Christ is present. He should be your focus. If, God forbid, there are abuses, offer any suffering you exprience on account of it to Christ present in the Eucharist. Use that time to pray for the Church, for the healing of it, for the strengthening of the Clergy, for expansion of the Church.

I also find that it is very humbling to consider my own sins at this time (if there is some liturgical abuse occurring), and take them into the context of how much my personal actions and inactions have offended God, since those are what I personally will have to answer for. It helps me to feel more charitable and less judgemental of anyone who might be less reverent than I would like, or anyone who might be committing an abuse.

It’s not easy to place yourself and family in such a situation (my children have asked me why we go to that different Mass). Use it as a springboard for catechism for your kids. If you don’t know the answers, use it as a springboard for yourself to study Vatican II, and the Church documents pertaining to it. Study the GIRM. God will let you use any abuses to bring you and your family closer to Him, if you let Him. This is preferable to becoming bitter and accusatory.

Ultimately, I have to remind myself that God won’t abandon His Church - any Catholic will be able to see where it is. Any faults and missteps that happen along the way will be corrected in His good time. We just need to unite our prayers to His will.
 
falcogreg said:
…First, we are staunch traditionalists and just cannot embrace the NO mass. Secondly, we try to limit our children’s exposure to this (although my son attends catholic HS and goes to the NO mass during the school year…
Click to expand...
It’s stunning to think someone would risk commiting a mortal sin and facilitate his family in the commiting of additional mortal sins because they did not care for the Ordinary Form of the Mass.

Although I guess it’s not nearly as stunning as someone who would forgo the chance of being at Calvary while Jesus Christ was offered to His Father for our sins – past present and future. **In fact I dare you to meditate on that for five minutes. You are willing to forgo the salvific grace that flows from being present at the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ to His Father because you do not like the OF Mass. ** Astounding!

Rather than limiting your kids’ exposure to the Ordinary Form of the Mass maybe you should focus more on what the Mass (OF or EF!!) is all about!!
 
bacon_man said:
Archbishop Lefebvre is not a credable source, he was excommunicated for disobedience.
Click to expand...
The quote is referring to the Canon Law arguments. It has nothing to do with ABL. Please read the relevant posts before responding. Thanks.
 
There is a continual reference to personal preference here. This is not the case. The question is a moral one: whether, as a Catholic, the OF of Mass is morally possible to attend. For many it is not, for reasons stated in my first post on this thread. Many believe it is a Protestantized and ambiguous form of Mass that eventually tends towards the diminution of faith over time. And that is when it is said reverently. We are not even talking about rock masses, etc at this point. Read Cardinal Ottaviani and Bacci’s criticism of the New Mass they presented to Paul VI. For many Catholics these very legitimate criticisms still hold true.

Whether you agree with this belief or not, those who do believe it are bound, in conscience, not to attend. In addition, I believe they are, through the “moral impossibility” exceptions in Canon Law, not in violation of the ecclesiastical laws regarding Sunday obligation.
 
CB_Catholic said:
The OP had no idea if the OF Mass was going to be spiritually endangering. He took it upon himself to presume it might be soley because it was an OF Mass, a judgment he had no right to make, because the OF Mass IS the ordinary Mass of the Catholic Church, and he must accept that it is a valid Rite of the Catholic Church. He deliberately missed Mass because he doesn’t like the OF. There is no excuse for this presumption, nor for not accepting the OF as a valid Mass. One’s personal preference does not trump over one’s obligation to attend Mass, esp. if there is no real reason to believe the Mass is not valid. We are not our own Magesterium–we are subject to the teaching of the Church.

While the Pope made it clear that the EF should be made available if there is a stable congregation to those who wish to attend it, he also made it clear that the OF Mass is the ordinary Mass of the Latin Rite and that it must be accepted as equally valid by all Catholics. Period. So there is no excuse for missing Mass if the EF is not available.
Click to expand...
I will add that anyone who feels they will be “spiritually endangered” simply because it’s a certain type of Mass – OF, EF or whatever has a very serious problem that needs the attention of spritual guidance. The form alone of any valid/licit Mass will not “spiritually endanger” ANY properly formed Catholic Church.
 
falcogreg said:
To a degree, you are correct in that I made an assumption. However, being that this is the same church that allowed a protestant minister say mass without informing the laity certainly puts serious doubt in my mind. What else will they allow? I guess that also, since every time in recent years that I have attended a NO mass, major abuses have occurred. I’m getting jaded to the point that I am wondering if I can attend without seeing some abuse. BTW, to me altar girls, EM’s, communions in the hand are NOT dogma. Why they are universally practiced is beyond my comprehension. To me, these are abuses as well.
Click to expand...
It’s not the “NO Mass.” That is an offensive and bigoted slur. It’s the Ordinary Form of the Mass.

Stop with the negative hyperbole already. Not all OF Masses are as you suggest. In fact most are not.

Try understanding what the Mass actually is. I think one indicator of devoutness is the ability to block-out the sorts of things you’re fixated on in order to receive the grace that flows from ANY valid Mass. You’re so side-tracked and angry about what you feel is in error that you are completely missing God greated gift to us – eternal life through His Son.

Why not use your vacation to increase your ability to focus and concentrate? Sit in the first row. Block as much out as you can and just focus on the miracle that takes place atop the altar of sacrifice at ANY valid Mass. If Mass doesn’t seem like 5 minutes long (no matter its actual length) and if you aren’t ready for a short nap afterwards you are aren’t focusing/concentrating hard enough.
 
Addressing another issue in the OP’s post - your friend, if he/she witnessed the Presbyterian sacriledge, should immediately write to or speak with the bishop about this. This is a VERY SERIOUS sacriledge. It is beyond a simple liturgical abuse such as holding hands during the Our Father or not kneeling during the consecration. It renders the Mass invalid, and is a gross injustice for the laity of that parish.

Also, you mentioned that your priest said you should basically go to any Mass while you were on vacation, including an Orthodox one if no Catholic service was available. I think this is incorrect. You aren’t ever required to attend a Orthodox Divine Liturgy to fulfill your Sunday obligation. While you can receive sacraments in the Orthodox Church validly, this would only be done in extreme circumstances, such as being in danger of death. So, for example, if you were traveling in Greece and couldn’t find a single Catholic parish to attend Mass at, you would be dispensed from your Sunday obligation by virtue of that (provided you diligently looked for a Catholic Mass and found none).
 
OhMalley said:
It’s not the “NO Mass.” That is an offensive and bigoted slur. It’s the Ordinary Form of the Mass.
Click to expand...
How is that an offensive and bigoted slur? As I understand it, “NO” means Novus Ordo, just like “TLM” means Traditional Latin Ma.s.s. This was what the “Ordinary Form” was called up until HH Pp. Benedict XVI changed the names.
 
pickguard1 said:
How is that an offensive and bigoted slur? As I understand it, “NO” means Novus Ordo, just like “TLM” means Traditional Latin Ma.s.s. This was what the “Ordinary Form” was called up until HH Pp. Benedict XVI changed the names.
Click to expand...
sorry for the periods in Mass, the thingy wouldn’t let me simply bold and underline the “M” and allow the rest to follow without blanking it out. 😊
 
dashso40 said:
I go to NO mass because I have little kids and they would never last in a traditional Mass…
Click to expand...
Odd, considering the legions of families with well-behaved young children who attend most EF Masses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top