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

[OhMalley]

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).

NEITHER are “liturgical abuses.”

 

[BernadetteM]

I fear that with the attitude of the OP and many others who only want the TLM and will avoid going to an OF and then protesting in such an uncharitable manner towards all other valid rites or usages as the case may be, will cause many Bishops to put an end to offereing the TLM.

It has been difficult enough for some Bishops to allow the TLM to be celebrated and if they only hear negative feelings about the OF and that it is a sin to attend one, they might possibly deny parishes from celebrating it.

I know of one parish that offered the TLM and because the congregation attending it caused friction within the whole parish it was stopped. The TLM parishioners wanted no part of the parish except for the celebration the the Mass.

This is a problem that needs to changed. It was like they were an exclusive part of the parish and above everyone who attended the other Masses. Do these traditional Catholics feel that the Holy Father is the Head of the Church or do they feel that a priest or a Bishop of the SPPX is the head? From the comments it seems that they go with the latter.

There are many Catholics who are traditional but don’t go to the extreme and do the best they can to worship Christ at Mass even when there are irreverent actions going on.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

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.

This is not what the Church actually teaches, you have twisted the canons to say what you wish rather than taking them for what they actually say.

To say that the OF is morally dangerous is to separate yourself from the Church.

I believe Pope Benedict has said somethings on this.

The Mass is the Mass, whether it is the OF or the EF. You can not skip out on the Sunday obligation because you prefer the EF and you can not get to one.

You can keep lieing and leading people to sin but I will stand against you and state the Truth.

To not attend an OF Mass because you prefer the EF Mass and there is no EF Mass available on Sunday is a mortal sin, as the Church teaches.

 

[OhMalley]

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.

Are you serious or are you just trying to be offensive?

"NO " brings an IMMEDIATE negative connotation to the “.” That’s obvious to absolutely anyone. Try all you like but no one can explain their way out of that one.

The Church does not use the label “Novus Ordo” nor has it ever used “NO.” Check the current Roman Missal for the name of the Mass. It’s not the “Novus Ordo.”

It’s the Mass of Pope Paul IV; the Pauline Mass; or as Pope Benedict XVI calls it “the Ordinary Form of the Mass.” If you want to save keystrokes the “OF Mass” or even just the “OF.”

To ignore the terminology used by the Pope so they can quietly gig the OF is monumentally bad-form. Not very Catholic either.

I’m sure most on these forums are aware of what I just typed. Those that continue to use “Novus Ordo” and especially the bigoted slur “NO Mass” are just trying to denigrate what they personally do not like and/or understand.

I’m confident they’ll face God at some point on this matter.

 

[CB_Catholic]

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.

Being bound by your conscience is being bound by a thoroughly informed conscience and we inform our consciences by studying the teachings of the Church. That argument has been used by many to violate Church teaching, the most notoroious example being birth control. People may think they’ve informed their consciences when in reality, they don’t agree with Church teaching and don’t want to submit to the Magesterium. I think that is a rather shaky road to go down. You’ve got to be brutally honest with yourself and thoroughly examine your motives before you go that route, because God is not fooled, and the consequences can be eternal. But only God can judge that.

 

[OhMalley]

**Being bound by your conscience is being bound by a thoroughly informed conscience and we inform our consciences by studying the teachings of the Church. **That argument has been used by many to violate Church teaching, the most notoroious example being birth control. People may think they’ve informed their consciences when in reality, they don’t agree with Church teaching and don’t want to submit to the Magesterium. I think that is a rather shaky road to go down. You’ve got to be brutally honest with yourself and thoroughly examine your motives before you go that route, because God is not fooled, and the consequences can be eternal. But only God can judge that.

BRAVO! Your posting should become a stickie at the beginning of this forum!
:clapping:

 

[OhMalley]

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.

You’re wrong about that. It was the Mass of Pope Paul IV or the “Pauline Mass”

 

[Chatter163]

The Church does not use the label “Novus Ordo” nor has it ever used “NO.”

Actually, it did, when the Mass was first revised–it was referred to as the Novus Ordo Missae, new Order of Mass. That is where the name came from. :yup:

The term “Novus Ordo Missae” was coined when, in advance of the 1969 decision on the form of the revision of the Roman Missal, a preliminary draft of two sections was published. The one containing the unvarying part of the Mass, in English called the Ordinary of the Mass, is in Latin called Ordo Missae. To distinguish it from the Ordo Missae of the previous (1962) edition of the Missal, some referred to it as the “Novus Ordo Missae”, novus being the Latin word for “new”, because the outward form of the liturgy outlined in that section was at some points changed considerably. The term was later applied to the entirety of the revised Mass liturgy. The other section published in draft form at the same time was the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM), with more detailed directives than given in the rubrics of the Ordinary of the Mass. The five parts (texts) of the the Roman Catholic Mass, which do not vary except by omission on certain occasions are known as the Ordinary of the Mass. … Latin was the language originally spoken in the region around Rome called Latium. …
statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Novus-Ordo-Missae

 

[bkovacs]

Canon Law states;

Can. 1247 On Sundays and other holydays of obligation, the faithful are obliged to assist at Mass. They are also to abstain from such work or business that would inhibit the worship to be given to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s Day, or the due relaxation of mind and body.

It says Mass, it does not say the Ordinary Form of the Mass or the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. So if there was an OF Mass that you could have gone to and you did not receive a dispensation from your pastor to miss Mass then yes, you sin and you compounded this by not allowing your children (if you have any) to attend Mass.

What if it was a Byzantine liturgy that I had to miss. Should I go to an Orthodox Church or a Roman Catholic NO Mass, with guitars and the lot.

 

[OhMalley]

Actually, it did, when the Mass was first revised–it was referred to as the Novus Ordo Missae, new Order of Mass. That is where the name came from.

You’re wrong. The Romal Missal has never used the label “Novus Ordo” Mass. Nor has any official Church documentation since well before the promulgation of the OF – now over 40 years ago.

It’s used now as a means to gig the OF – and little else.

 

[OhMalley]

What if it was a Byzantine liturgy that I had to miss. Should I go to an Orthodox Church or a Roman Catholic EF Mass?

The Mass (OF or EF) can substitute for the Divine Liturgy. The DL celebrated outside the Catholic Church CANNOT under ordinary circumstance. Simple.

 

[CB_Catholic]

What if it was a Byzantine liturgy that I had to miss. Should I go to an Orthodox Church or a Roman Catholic NO Mass, with guitars and the lot.

You would go to the Roman Catholic NO Mass, because the Orthodox Liturgy does not fulfill your Sunday obligation. And if the music of the guitar offends you, just suck it up and offer it up for someone who needs it. And try to remember that the guitarist loves Jesus as much as you do, and is doing his best for Him, and God is pleased with his offering if he is sincere. That should get you out of there without a total breakdown.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

What if it was a Byzantine liturgy that I had to miss. Should I go to an Orthodox Church or a Roman Catholic NO Mass, with guitars and the lot.

I would attend the Latin Church’s liturgy, which would be the Ordinary Form or the Extraordinary Form of the Mass as I could receive communion there. But then I also have other obligations due to my vows that the laity do not have.

There is nothing wrong with guitars, they are used extensively in Latin America as they can afford them. Now the music choice might be off but that is another issue.

But you are not obligated to attend a Latin Church Mass, the obligation resides with your Church and if you are on vacation where there is no Byzantine Church of which ever Byzantine Church you belong to then there is no obligation but I would speak with your pastor or spiritual father before going and do as they say.

 

[stevusmagnus]

Being bound by your conscience is being bound by a thoroughly informed conscience and we inform our consciences by studying the teachings of the Church…You’ve got to be brutally honest with yourself and thoroughly examine your motives before you go that route, because God is not fooled, and the consequences can be eternal. But only God can judge that.

One can thoroughly informed one’s conscience in the teachings of the Pre-Conciliar Popes as well as the Saints and those eminent theologians and Prelates at the time who fought and criticized the New Rite of Mass predicting the harm the New Rite would do to souls. Even our current Pope once described it as a “banal, on the spot production”.

Even Saints canonized after VCII such as St. Escriva refused to say the New Mass, obtaining a celebret to say the old.

For one steeped in the Traditions of the Church, it is quite possible to see that the New Mass would be so alien to the Catholic Faith practiced for 1960 years that one truly, in conscience, would decide to protect their Catholic faith, they could not attend. Attendance would indeed be morally impossible for them.

I ask you where you would draw the line yourselves? Is it morally permissible for you to attend a Mass with liturgical dance? Rock music? Scandalously dressed EM’s? Mimes? Heretical hymns? Heretical homilies? Changing the words of the Mass? If there is any NO Mass you would not attend, you have made a moral judgment, as we all should. It just so happens that for many Traditional Catholics that line is drawn at attendance at any NO Mass. This line is drawn after much study and reflection of true Catholic theology, the NO Rite itself, the examples of Saints, and the tragic fruits the New Rite of Mass has produced in our time.

 

[EasterJoy]

Why is there anyone inventing an excuse for this nonsense? I can’t believe the thread went beyond a page.

If nothing else, the OP took his family on a vacation where he knew for a fact he wouldn’t be able to attend a TLM. He didn’t ask his pastor about this beforehand, but sailed right along and did “what he thought was right”–a non-traditional concept of following the conscience, if ever there was one. Then when he got back and finally asked after the matter, he didn’t like the answer he got from his pastor (and presumably his confessor), a priest who celebrates the TLM himself, so he comes here looking for a second opinoin.

There is a priest shortage in this country. If you can find a priest with the luxury of never saying the OF, you’d look for a long time. I don’t know if one exists, outside of certain religious orders. Yet you, OP, think that if you are inconvenienced into having to go to an OF Mass once, you are ill-used and free of your Sunday obligation. Never mind that the country is full of obedient priests who celebrate the OF every day and twice on Sundays. Never mind that you are teaching your children that dislike of some particular valid Mass constitutes a valid reason for excusing yourself from the Sunday obligation.

You need to consider that your children may grow up, live in someplace where the TLM isn’t available, and excuse themselves from Mass entirely. They will only be living as you taught them they may choose to do. What then?

 

[stevusmagnus]

You’re wrong. The Romal Missal has never used the label “Novus Ordo” Mass. Nor has any official Church documentation since well before the promulgation of the OF – now over 40 years ago.

It’s used now as a means to gig the OF – and little else.

Pope Paul VI 1976

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/speeches/1976/documents/hf_p-vi_spe_19760524_concistoro_lt.html

**Novus Ordo **promulgatus est, ut in locum veteris substitueretur post maturam deliberationem, atque ad exsequendas normas quae a Concilio Vaticano II impertitae sunt.

 

[stevusmagnus]

Byz Cath,

This is not about preference it is a moral question.

To state that the NO is dangerous is not to separate oneself from the Church. Otherwise Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci and Archbishop Lefebvre before he was suspended would have been separated from the Church for even holding this opinion. They were not. There were many priests, bishops, and faithful who protested against the NO Mass. It is true the vast majority eventually went along with it out of obedience. But that in no way takes away their sincere and vehement opposition to the changes. Many Traditional Catholics sincerely share this opposition and, in good conscience, cannot attend, especially now that we have the gift of hindsight and can see the devastation that occurred after the de facto banning of the Old Rite and introduction and mandatory use of the New.

Many here would readily admit that abuse filled NO Masses that litter our nation are dangerous. Some Traditional Catholics simply go a step further and truly believe that the NO Mass itself is dangerous because if its ambiguity and Protestantization.

I don’t believe I am twisting the Canons at all as they are rather broad and even go so far as to allow a Catholic to attend a schismatic non-Catholic Mass if there is “spiritual advantage” over the NO Mass. That is a very strong statement. As I also pointed out Canon Law dispenses with the Sunday obligation for grave cause. Moral impossibility is always a grave cause.

I respect your right to disagree, but I do not believe this is an un-Catholic position especially since we are all put in an unprecedented predicament as never before has there been such a crisis of faith in the Church.

 

[allhers]

Why is there anyone inventing an excuse for this nonsense? I can’t believe the thread went beyond a page.

If nothing else, the OP took his family on a vacation where he knew for a fact he wouldn’t be able to attend a TLM. He didn’t ask his pastor about this beforehand, but sailed right along and did “what he thought was right”–a non-traditional concept of following the conscience, if ever there was one. Then when he got back and finally asked after the matter, he didn’t like the answer he got from his pastor (and presumably his confessor), a priest who celebrates the TLM himself, so he comes here looking for a second opinoin.

There is a priest shortage in this country. If you can find a priest with the luxury of never saying the OF, you’d look for a long time. I don’t know if one exists, outside of certain religious orders. Yet you, OP, think that if you are inconvenienced into having to go to an OF Mass once, you are ill-used and free of your Sunday obligation. Never mind that the country is full of obedient priests who celebrate the OF every day and twice on Sundays. Never mind that you are teaching your children that dislike of some particular valid Mass constitutes a valid reason for excusing yourself from the Sunday obligation.

You need to consider that your children may grow up, live in someplace where the TLM isn’t available, and excuse themselves from Mass entirely. They will only be living as you taught them they may choose to do. What then?

(Except for the part about him checking with his Priest already, cause I didn’t read that he did that yet.)

But, let me tell you that there are many awesome Priest who do celebrate both forms and many awesome Priest who only celebrate one form and do excellent at it.

I grew up with no choice in the matter and my Father took us to the new form and I am still a praticing Catholic (who longs for the TLM but…) I go to what is available wherever I
happen to be and find Jesus present in the Blessed Sacrament when I receive Him in Holy Communion, and like so many others have said----“offer it up”, pray for the Priest and those who make the Mass look like a circus. They are not all, however, like that, some are
very reverent and holy Masses and with Jesus there, you can’t go wrong!!

At least OP, it seems you ought to have done more research before you went so to answer you question, yes, I think you need to go to confession. At the very least you could have asked for a dispensation first. But I wouldn’t have ever spoken up had you not asked because I believe that both Masses are valid.

 

[OhMalley]

Why is there anyone inventing an excuse for this nonsense? I can’t believe the thread went beyond a page.

If nothing else, the OP took his family on a vacation where he knew for a fact he wouldn’t be able to attend a TLM. He didn’t ask his pastor about this beforehand, but sailed right along and did “what he thought was right”–a non-traditional concept of following the conscience, if ever there was one. Then when he got back and finally asked after the matter, he didn’t like the answer he got from his pastor (and presumably his confessor), a priest who celebrates the TLM himself, so he comes here looking for a second opinoin.

There is a priest shortage in this country. If you can find a priest with the luxury of never saying the OF, you’d look for a long time. I don’t know if one exists, outside of certain religious orders. Yet you, OP, think that if you are inconvenienced into having to go to an OF Mass once, you are ill-used and free of your Sunday obligation. Never mind that the country is full of obedient priests who celebrate the OF every day and twice on Sundays. Never mind that you are teaching your children that dislike of some particular valid Mass constitutes a valid reason for excusing yourself from the Sunday obligation.

You need to consider that your children may grow up, live in someplace where the TLM isn’t available, and excuse themselves from Mass entirely. They will only be living as you taught them they may choose to do. What then?

The best post yet on this entire thread. Well done…

 

[bpbasilphx]

All authorized liturgical rites of the Church are equal.

Therefore, if the only mass you can attend is a Pauline Mass on a Sunday or other day of obligation, YES, it is a sin to refuse to attend it.