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.
ByzCath said:
When I have a choice between what the Church actually teaches and what some ultra-traditionalist anonymous posters says, I will stand with the Church every time.
Click to expand...
The Church actually nowhere requires that one like the NO Mass at all nor does She require we attend even one in our lifetime.
 
To: Byzcath.

Sorry, but that’s what I read on these forums, and elsewhere, I think, as to how the O.F/N.O. was originally envisaged as being said; with Latin, Gregorian Chant and the priest ad-orientem.

I was not being sarcastic. I thought you might know more places where the O.F was said this way. I know only one.

I doubt whether anyone on the Vat. II Council foresaw CITH, EMHCs and folksy hymns, either. If the trend of innovation continues at this pace, the average O.F. could look quite … interesting … in another 40 years. It worries me.

I am also concerned that Bishops do not seem to be aware of the demographic time-bomb ticking in their dioceses. Given the priest shortage, you think they’d welcome those wishing to say the TLM; new seminarians, the FSSP etc., if only to keep the numbers of clergy up and parishes going. I hear this is not the case.

It annoys me that, barring a ‘new springtime’, simple, cold Darwinism may dictate what kind of Mass at all I can attend in the next couple of decades, if God spares me.
 
stevusmagnus said:
Padre Pio, obviously.

There is reason to believe that Mother Theresa participated with Hindus in false worship. This does not take away the good that she did, but it must be remembered she is not a Saint.

Neither for that matter is John XXIII. He may have been personally pious but his actions as Pope, including inviting previously condemned theologians to act as experts at the Council were dreadfully imprudent and lead to the auto-demolition of the Church (words of Paul VI).
Click to expand...
You’ve taken the cake with this one. When you become pope you can establish things as you wish. Until then, you would do well to study a bit more the subject at hand to appreciate the knowledge and wisdom that both JREductation and Byzcath have to offer. Really, you sound like a child arguing with his father because he thinks his father just doesn’t “get it.”
 
JReducation said:
The community that you’re citing was dismissed from the Capuchin Franciscan order. You know that?
Click to expand...
Yes. And they were suspended for actually only one reason: adhering to the Traditional Catholic Faith and refusing the changes that have helped destroy the Church ( as we can see from statistics). They were sanctioned for continuing to adhere to the Traditions of the Catholic Church including the TLM and previous Papal teachings against religious liberty and ecumenism and for refusing to say the NO mass which Cardinal Ottaviani called “a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass”.

Again it is a sign of the crisis in the Church that an order of Capuchins who only wanted to remain Catholic and practice their religion exactly as Padre Pio practiced it, were sanctioned unjustly for it. As we know now, and they knew then, the TLM was never abrogated, therefore they always had a right to say it instead of the NO. I suppose they will continue to wait for an apology and a regularization in God’s good time.

Meanwhile the Vatican actually approves of the Neo-Catechumenal Way and the Charismatic movement whose orthodoxy and liturgical practices are questionable at best. This is all evidence of the crisis and confusion in our Church today.

In any case, the friars did not so much give their “opinion” in my quotation as to quote from an Imprimatured book.

Also to call your own order the “real” Capuchins seems to me rather insulting to these men who are “real” priests and brothers also and who have given their lives to a Christ.
 
Timothysis said:
You’ve taken the cake with this one. When you become pope you can establish things as you wish. Until then, you would do well to study a bit more the subject at hand to appreciate the knowledge and wisdom that both JREductation and Byzcath have to offer. Really, you sound like a child arguing with his father because he thinks his father just doesn’t “get it.”
Click to expand...
You’ve provided no substance to back up your assertions.
 
Layman said:
To: Byzcath.

Sorry, but that’s what I read on these forums, and elsewhere, I think, as to how the O.F/N.O. was originally envisaged as being said; with Latin, Gregorian Chant and the priest ad-orientem.

I was not being sarcastic. I thought you might know more places where the O.F was said this way. I know only one.

I doubt whether anyone on the Vat. II Council foresaw CITH, EMHCs and folksy hymns, either. If the trend of innovation continues at this pace, the average O.F. could look quite … interesting … in another 40 years. It worries me.

I am also concerned that Bishops do not seem to be aware of the demographic time-bomb ticking in their dioceses. Given the priest shortage, you think they’d welcome those wishing to say the TLM; new seminarians, the FSSP etc., if only to keep the numbers of clergy up and parishes going. I hear this is not the case.

It annoys me that, barring a ‘new springtime’, simple, cold Darwinism may dictate what kind of Mass at all I can attend in the next couple of decades, if God spares me.
Click to expand...
Yeah the Allentown Diocese just closed 44 Catholic churches. I guess not enough young people were going to the NO Mass or supporting the Church.

mcall.com/news/local/all-churchclosingphotos-0713,0,872991.photogallery
 
stevusmagnus said:
Yes. And they were suspended for actually only one reason: adhering to the Traditional Catholic Faith and refusing the changes that have helped destroy the Church ( as we can see from statistics). They were sanctioned for continuing to adhere to the Traditions of the Catholic Church including the TLM and previous Papal teachings against religious liberty and ecumenism and for refusing to say the NO mass which Cardinal Ottaviani called “a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass”.

Again it is a sign of the crisis in the Church that an order of Capuchins who only wanted to remain Catholic and practice their religion exactly as Padre Pio practiced it, were sanctioned unjustly for it. As we know now, and they knew then, the TLM was never abrogated, therefore they always had a right to say it instead of the NO. I suppose they will continue to wait for an apology and a regularization in God’s good time.

Meanwhile the Vatican actually approves of the Neo-Catechumenal Way and the Charismatic movement whose orthodoxy and liturgical practices are questionable at best. This is all evidence of the crisis and confusion in our Church today.

In any case, the friars did not so much give their “opinion” in my quotation as to quote from an Imprimatured book.

Also to call your own order the “real” Capuchins seems to me rather insulting to these men who are “real” priests and brothers also and who have given their lives to a Christ.
Click to expand...
The reason why I said the real Capuchins, is because these friars are no longer Capuchins. They were expelled from the order. Their vows were suspended by the Superior General and approved by Cardinal Ratzinger. When a religious is dismissed from his religious community, he or she is no longer a religious. If he is a priest he becomes a suspended secular priest, but is not a religious.

A religious cannot disobey his major superior except when ordered to sin. In that case, there is a process that he has to go through. It’s juridical process to which he must appeal. If he loses the appeal or fails to appeal, the order of the superior stands. If he fails to obey, then he is sent three reprimands in writings. If he fails to obey, then he is ordered to obey under penalty of mortal sin. If he fails to obey again, then the dismissal process begins.

The Capuchin Fathers were told to obey their major superior. They were given all the chances that the Rule of St. Francis and Canon Law allow. They failed to comply. This has nothing to do with the form of the liturgy. It has to do with a solemn vow of obedience. The form of the liturgy does not trump a solemn vow of obedience. Ask any Carmelite, Benedictine, Franciscan, Augustinian, Trinitarian or Carthusian. We all make solemn vows. Solemn vows have nothing to do with the priesthood. They are part of being a religious. They are what makes you a religious.

The Capuchin Fathers chose their priesthood over the religious life. Therefore, they forfeited the right to belong to a religious order. You do not ener the religious life to be a priest. You enter the religious life to be a member of a community. If you fail to live according to the norms of that community, you may no longer belong to the community. You are then expelled.

Therefore, they are not true Capuchins. They do not have canonical succession from St. Francis. For a religious community to have canonical succession from the founder, they must remain in communion with the legitimate successor of the founder. The Capuchin Fathers are no longer in communion with the successor of St. Francis. Therefore, they are not Capuchins or Franciscans. Observe that they have even changed the name of their community. The four orders that St. Francis founded are not allowed to call themselves Fathers. We are Friars, Fratres or Brothers. They obviously acknowledge that they are a different organization and not part of the Francisan family or they would not have changed the name of the community.

We cannot use a group who has committed a grave sin against a solemn vow of obedience to support an argument inside the Church. The most we can do is pray for them that they may find peace.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF
 
JReducation said:
The community that you’re citing was dismissed from the Capuchin Franciscan order. You know that? For two reasons:
  1. Their support of Archbishop Lefebvre.
  2. Observe the titles that they use: Capuchin Fathers. The real Capuchins are not called by that name anywhere in the Church. They are the Capuchin Friars. The Capuchin Fathers is a group of friars that were expelled from the order because they refused to obey the superior general, the constitutions and the Holy See.
When looking for any Franciscan reference, make sure that it says Friars, Fratres or Brothers. If it says Fathers, you can be sure that they are not in communion with the Franciscan family. That’s not the traditional name of our religious family.

Their opinion is not very credible when they have separated themselves from their order by disobeying and violating a solemn vow of obedience.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
The other big red flag in the information is the website, sspx. They have not legitimate ministry within the Church and that is from the Holy Father.
 
ByzCath said:
The other big red flag in the information is the website, sspx. They have not legitimate ministry within the Church and that is from the Holy Father.
Click to expand...
Br. David. you’re a Carmelite right? Your order makes solemn right?

When a man is dismissed from an order, after many corrections and hearings for failure to comply with his superiors, is he still a member of the Carmelite Order? Can he continue to use the name Carmelite?

Thanks,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
ByzCath said:
The other big red flag in the information is the website, sspx. They have not legitimate ministry within the Church and that is from the Holy Father.
Click to expand...
Br. David. you’re a Carmelite right? Your order makes solemn vows right?

When a man is dismissed from your order, after many corrections and hearings for failure to comply with his superiors, is he still a member of the Carmelite Order? Can he continue to use the name Carmelite? Is he still a religious? Does he continue to have canonical succession with the early Carmelites?

Thanks,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
The community that you’re citing was dismissed from the Capuchin Franciscan order. You know that? For two reasons:
  1. Their support of Archbishop Lefebvre.
  2. Observe the titles that they use: Capuchin Fathers. The real Capuchins are not called by that name anywhere in the Church. They are the Capuchin Friars. The Capuchin Fathers is a group of friars that were expelled from the order because they refused to obey the superior general, the constitutions and the Holy See.
When looking for any Franciscan reference, make sure that it says Friars, Fratres or Brothers. If it says Fathers, you can be sure that they are not in communion with the Franciscan family. That’s not the traditional name of our religious family.

Their opinion is not very credible when they have separated themselves from their order by disobeying and violating a solemn vow of obedience.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
img18.imageshack.us/img18/3904/padrepiowithab.th.jpg

img188.imageshack.us/img188/6037/padrepiokissingabsring.th.jpg

Looks like someone else liked Archbishop Lefebvre. 🙂
 
JReducation said:
Br. David. you’re a Carmelite right? Your order makes solemn vows right?

When a man is dismissed from your order, after many corrections and hearings for failure to comply with his superiors, is he still a member of the Carmelite Order? Can he continue to use the name Carmelite? Is he still a religious? Does he continue to have canonical succession with the early Carmelites?

Thanks,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
Well just as many Catholics continue to use the word Catholic to describe themselves and other truly Catholic religious communities (mostly of diocesen right) use the title Carmelite without being part of either the O.Carm. or the O.C.D., yes they can use the term Carmelite to describe themselves, but that does not make it so. The word Carmelite, like Catholic, is not copyrighted, so anyone can use it.

But in the manner the question is asked, no they can no longer use the term and actually if they were part of the order and were expelled and they continued to use the title while trying to pass themselves off as a member in good standing of the order there could be legal actions the order could take against them in the United States.
 
Layman said:
To: Byzcath.

Sorry, but that’s what I read on these forums, and elsewhere, I think, as to how the O.F/N.O. was originally envisaged as being said; with Latin, Gregorian Chant and the priest ad-orientem.

I was not being sarcastic. I thought you might know more places where the O.F was said this way. I know only one.

I doubt whether anyone on the Vat. II Council foresaw CITH, EMHCs and folksy hymns, either. If the trend of innovation continues at this pace, the average O.F. could look quite … interesting … in another 40 years. It worries me.

I am also concerned that Bishops do not seem to be aware of the demographic time-bomb ticking in their dioceses. Given the priest shortage, you think they’d welcome those wishing to say the TLM; new seminarians, the FSSP etc., if only to keep the numbers of clergy up and parishes going. I hear this is not the case.

It annoys me that, barring a ‘new springtime’, simple, cold Darwinism may dictate what kind of Mass at all I can attend in the next couple of decades, if God spares me.
Click to expand...
Ok, I am sorry that I took your post the wrong way.

There is a parish in the Detroit area where the priest celebrates the OF ad-orientem and I believe it is in Latin, I am not sure about the use of Gregorian Chant though.
 
ByzCath said:
Well just as many Catholics continue to use the word Catholic to describe themselves and other truly Catholic religious communities (mostly of diocesen right) use the title Carmelite without being part of either the O.Carm. or the O.C.D., yes they can use the term Carmelite to describe themselves, but that does not make it so. The word Carmelite, like Catholic, is not copyrighted, so anyone can use it.

But in the manner the question is asked, no they can no longer use the term and actually if they were part of the order and were expelled and they continued to use the title while trying to pass themselves off as a member in good standing of the order there could be legal actions the order could take against them in the United States.
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about the first group. There are many religious communities that belong to the big five families, but are not part of the original foundation.

I am speaking about members of any religious community who are expelled. In this case, they no longer are Carmelites or Franciscans or Martians for that matter, unless they found their own community. But Bkovacs has present the Capuchin Fathers as part of the Capuchin Order, which they are not. They were expelled because they refused to obey the Superior General, the Constitutions and the Sacred Congregation for Religious Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life. Therefore, they lose their canonical succession.

He can present themn and their arguments, but he cannot pass them as part of the Capuchin Franciscan Friars. They are not. They are not even part of the Franciscan Family, since the rule says that you may never disobey the Superior General or the Pope.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
Even today, the EF cannot be mandated within a monastery, priory, or friary. Those houses are subject to the jurisdiction of the major superior. Summorum Pontificum clearly mentions that regular priests celebrating mass in their chapels, must be guided by the major superior and the statutes of their institute. Anyd religious superior can exempt or prohibit within hin house, until somethign becomes universal law, such as the OF. The OF cannot be prohibitted, even among religious communities that are traditionalists. The EF is their choice. That’s different from prohibition of the OF. In other words, you can prohibit what is extraordinary and you can exempt from it.
Click to expand...
This is a problem the FSSP ran into a number of years ago. They tried to prohibit the celebration of the OF by their members. It seems some of the priests in the FSSP would concelebrate at the Holy Thursday Chrism Mass with the bishop of the diocese that they served it. Some of the members of the FSSP, included the, then, superior did not like this. These priests took it to Rome and Pope John Paul II over ruled the superior and actually replaced him.
 
bkovacs said:
img18.imageshack.us/img18/3904/padrepiowithab.th.jpg

img188.imageshack.us/img188/6037/padrepiokissingabsring.th.jpg

Looks like someone else liked Archbishop Lefebvre. 🙂
Click to expand...
These pictures do not support whatever case you’re trying to make. They were taken before 1968, before Padre Pio’s death. I doubt very much that Padre Pio would have approved the ordination of bishops without the Holy Father’s permission, since Padre Pio often spoke of the value of obedience.

Again, you are doing something that is very wrong and you need to stop. You are manipulating a saint. You are placing him in a situation where he does not belong. That is morally wrong. I have already sent a letter to those in authority about this manipulation. It is immoral and dishonest.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
I’m not talking about the first group. There are many religious communities that belong to the big five families, but are not part of the original foundation.

I am speaking about members of any religious community who are expelled. In this case, they no longer are Carmelites or Franciscans or Martians for that matter, unless they found their own community. But Bkovacs has present the Capuchin Fathers as part of the Capuchin Order, which they are not. They were expelled because they refused to obey the Superior General, the Constitutions and the Sacred Congregation for Religious Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life. Therefore, they lose their canonical succession.

He can present themn and their arguments, but he cannot pass them as part of the Capuchin Franciscan Friars. They are not. They are not even part of the Franciscan Family, since the rule says that you may never disobey the Superior General or the Pope.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
That is right, once expelled on stops being a member of the order and can no longer speak for it and when the Sacred Congregation rules that they are suspended as priests and no bishop will grant them faculties they have, as the Holy Father has said about the sspx, no legitimate ministry within the Church.
 
ByzCath said:
The other big red flag in the information is the website, sspx. They have not legitimate ministry within the Church and that is from the Holy Father.
Click to expand...
Yeah better run for your life! SSPX!. They may want to us to go on another Rosary Crusade. I’ve learned more about the pre-Vatican 2 church from them and actually got to see my first TLM on youtube, thanks to the SSPX. So I will not knock them one bit. The Holy father never told Bishop Fellay that he didn’t have a legitimate ministry within the Church either. Just like I will never knock the Eastern Orthodox Churches either. I learned allot about Eastern Christianity from them as well. I currently attend Orthodox Vespers every Sat night when I’m not working.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top