Is it okay to attend an SSPX Daily Mass and Receive Communion?

[Sir_Alec]

Your “argument or points” are nothing more than your own subjective, personal opinion. It is a fruitless endeavor to tackle “yeah, but…” arguments.

I base what I wrote on objective facts that are available to anyone who wants to know them. I also recognize that there has been a profound crisis in the Church, and that the Econe affair needs to be looked at in its proper context, and not just as a black and white issue. Your position on the SSPX is harsher than Rome’s at the present time.

Try reading the documentation that is available and decide whether an injustice occured in this matter. Don’t believe that “pray, pay and obey” is the highest theological virtue, and then preach it all over the internet.

And don’t accuse fellow Catholics of not having a high regard for the laws of the Church. We all struggle to live the Faith and obey the laws as best we can. But that doesn’t mean we can’t disagree with prudential judgements of the heirarchy, especially when a manifest act of injustice has occurred.

 

[EnchantedEve]

Your “argument or points” are nothing more than your own subjective, personal opinion. It is a fruitless endeavor to tackle “yeah, but…” arguments.

I am still not hearing any objective arguments against some of the facts either myself or others have made regarding historical precedent, scripture, or canon law. Apparently, actions of the saints, a deeper analysis of canon law, the words of Our Lord, all irrelevant, because any clear violation of the letter of the law is evil. Can you cite a Pope or saint who says we must follow bad or wicked bishops, priests or even Popes? Can you cite an instance where someone disobeyed Christ and His teachings to obey His earthly superior instead? Does Our Church’s history and precedents mean nothing? Do you really believe Our Lord came to establish a Church where His bishops can abuse Faith in Him and His Sacraments? Deny His teachings? Abuse His flock? Would this not make the Church’s mission to save souls irrelevant? Are we saved by “obedience alone?”

Unless the spirit of the law (and I have yet to see someone name to me an objectively evil act the SSPX as done) is the foundation the Law, than the Law is not justice, but tyranny. The Catholic Church becomes an irrational cult of people who are slaves to the hierarchy like extreme fundamentalist say we are. In theory we tell protestants that the pope can err unless speaking ex cathedra. In practice, there seems to be a denial of this and the pope has become ipso fact infallible always because no one is in a position to resist him either way, and the bishops by extension. It appears the Pope is then never wrong.

Unless a precedent can be cited for such extreme obedience, even to the point of being evil, than I believe I have sufficient facts to show that saints have disobeyed, theologians have justified and even encouraged this, and scripture encourages us to follow the Spirit not the letter, to our salvation.

 

[Timothysis]

I am still not hearing any objective arguments against some of the facts either myself or others have made regarding historical precedent, scripture, or canon law. Apparently, actions of the saints, a deeper analysis of canon law, the words of Our Lord, all irrelevant, because any clear violation of the letter of the law is evil. Can you cite a Pope or saint who says we must follow bad or wicked bishops, priests or even Popes? Can you cite an instance where someone disobeyed Christ and His teachings to obey His earthly superior instead? Does Our Church’s history and precedents mean nothing? Do you really believe Our Lord came to establish a Church where His bishops can abuse Faith in Him and His Sacraments? Deny His teachings? Abuse His flock? Would this not make the Church’s mission to save souls irrelevant? Are we saved by “obedience alone?”

Unless the spirit of the law (and I have yet to see someone name to me an objectively evil act the SSPX as done) is the foundation the Law, than the Law is not justice, but tyranny. The Catholic Church becomes an irrational cult of people who are slaves to the hierarchy like extreme fundamentalist say we are. In theory we tell protestants that the pope can err unless speaking ex cathedra. In practice, there seems to be a denial of this and the pope has become ipso fact infallible always because no one is in a position to resist him either way, and the bishops by extension. It appears the Pope is then never wrong.

Unless a precedent can be cited for such extreme obedience, even to the point of being evil, than I believe I have sufficient facts to show that saints have disobeyed, theologians have justified and even encouraged this, and scripture encourages us to follow the Spirit not the letter, to our salvation.

This is all nonsense. You are looking for someone to use past saints, popes, and even Christ Himself to answer questions that YOU ask and if it can’t be done then you proclaim victory. Your favored quote of St. Thomas “an unjust law is no law at all…” is your excuse to affirm or deny what YOU want affirmed or denied. It is an objective fact that the bishops and priests of the sspx are suspended and have been suspended of their priestly duties for the past 20 years. It is an objective fact that any celebration of the sacraments by them is illicit. To knowingly and actively participate in these celebrations is a possible act of disobedience if done for the wrong reasons. If this doesn’t bother you, then fine. But don’t use your confused logic and your “knowledge” of canon law and catholic theology to justify your positions because the Church does not agree with you.

 

[I_Believe]

How’s the inquisition going ?

Basically, those that suggest no one attend a SSPX Mass base their opinion on the fact that the SSPX clergy are suspended. That is a fair argument, supported by a single decree.

Those who say it’s OK to attend a SSPX Mass base their opinion on their stance that the suspensions are unjust. I’d say that is a fair argument, considering that Tradition always trumps all. History has proven this.

Can we all at least agree to accept what the Pope has said ?

“The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society. But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church. Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.”

 

[EnchantedEve]

This is all nonsense. You are looking for someone to use past saints, popes, and even Christ Himself to answer questions that YOU ask and if it can’t be done then you proclaim victory. Your favored quote of St. Thomas “an unjust law is no law at all…” is your excuse to affirm or deny what YOU want affirmed or denied. It is an objective fact that the bishops and priests of the sspx are suspended and have been suspended of their priestly duties for the past 20 years. It is an objective fact that any celebration of the sacraments by them is illicit. To knowingly and actively participate in these celebrations is a possible act of disobedience if done for the wrong reasons. If this doesn’t bother you, then fine. But don’t use your confused logic and your “knowledge” of canon law and catholic theology to justify your positions because the Church does not agree with you.

Again, it appears you are confusing the Vatican with the Church. They are NOT the same. I have cited plenty of examples where Church teaching and history favors the SSPX, even if the Vatican does not always currently agree.

This is not about winning or losing. This is about the Faith. If you can show me where Church teaching orders me to follow a bad bishop, I will take that as a sign that this idea has merit in Catholic teaching. At this point it sounds very much contrived and as another poster pointed out even the Vatican is not attacking SSPX supporters to this degree. Are you more Catholic than the Pope? Do not answer that, because it is a silly question. We are just as Catholic as he, and therefore are equally called to participate in the Faith actively. Is this not what Vatican II was supposed to be about? Your passion for order in the Church is respectable and laudable, but must this be at the expense of our individual contribution to the Faith family? Are we no less called to proclaim the Gospel?

This has turned from legitimate differences of opinion into a matter of dogma.
Is not St. Thomas’s quote relevant, even if subjective? I am not trying to point out the SSPX is necessarily right on in everything it is doing, but I am attempting to establish that there is precendent for their actions, which some here seem to be implying is not even a possibility. Do you believe it is possible for disobedience to ever be justified? If not, may you please explain to me then how the actions of others in Church history are justified. Are these saints then bad Catholics? This question cannot be avoided, because if the SSPX has no right whatsoever to disobey, than neither did these saints and their theological defenders, and therefore their sanctity becomes questionable. People can blow the SSPX off for all I care. I think the Institute of Christ the King is a great option. But to deny the SSPX can ever dissent and be justified, from the evidence, seems unjust.

Again, this bears no relation to my Faith life. I do not attend SSPX chapels, I go to the New Mass, and I have no relations with them. What does bother me is the claim we NEVER have the right or resposibility to disobey if the hierarchy is wrong. If that favors SSPX, so be it.

Yes, I know they are suspended. Yes, I know they were excommunicated. But if they are justfied, and truth is on their side, then their condemnation was unjust, null, and void, ipso facto, like any other unjust act. Until the Church has fully examined the matter, we must keep an open mind, and pray that they may be fully reconciled soon. Justice demands this.

God keep you in your strong devotion to our Holy Father!

 

[Aramis]

Eve: To answer your request for the document asserting the proper channels of report: Liturgicum Authenticum

 

[EnchantedEve]

Eve: To answer your request for the document asserting the proper channels of report: Liturgicum Authenticum

Thank you for providing a source. I was familiar with this document but had not read it.

Unfortunately, I am having a difficult time find the clause you refer to, but it is a lengthy document so I may be missing it. Could you point me in the right direction?

 

[EnchantedEve]

Eve: To answer your request for the document asserting the proper channels of report: Liturgicum Authenticum

Thank you for providing me something. I was familiar with this document but had not read it.

Unfortunately, I am having a difficult time find the clause you refer to, but it is a lengthy document so I may be missing it. Could you point mein the right direction?

 

[sparkielee]

Our wonderful FSSP priest allowed me to sit in on the Confirmation class he taught recently. He did tell us about the term “let him be anathema” when someone officially gets cut off from the church.

-sparkie

 

[C_Jackson_35]

If it is then not heretical, why do some continue to attend a Mass that is part of a society in rebellion against the Church?

In my opinion, the NO Mass is ambiguous and open to heretical interpretation especially when one is mindful of what the NO left out that was previously in the TLM and the theology behind the NO Mass, “The Paschal Mystery” idea which is novel. The Society explains this in depth in their book. “The Problem With the Liturgical Reform”. I highly recommend it.

Thus while the NO Mass meets the minimum requirements for validity and if its ambiguities are interpreted strictly in accord with Tradition it is not heretical, it is still very dangerous to the faith to attend in my opinion. Especially the way most NO Masses are performed in modern parishes; like something out of Godspell or a Hootenany condemning all talk of Traditional theology to the dustbin of silence.

To back up my opinion I cite the #'s which are the legacy of the New Mass; declining Mass attendance, vocations, widespread theological and moral confusion, loss of faith. Most importantly, the New Mass is simply the manifestation of the New Theology. The New Theology’s primary goal is not the salvation of souls but ecumenism.

Even if something is not outright heretical, it can still be dangerous by being ambiguous and also by leaving out most identifiably Catholic elements. Therefore if the TLM is available, which is unambiguous and a bulwark against heresy, it would be natural for informed Catholic souls to want to preserve and strengthen their Faith rather than attending a Mass that may help to dissolve it. We pray as we believe.

This is why I no longer attend the NO Mass, nor am I required to by Rome. By giving us the option Rome is implicitly giving us the right to judge which form of Mass is most beneficial to our souls. For me, it is clear cut.

 

[Aramis]

Sorry, but that last post is wrong.

If you are in an area where the only sunday divine worship service is the Roman OF, you ARE required to attend it, suffering under penalty of mortal sin if you don’t.

You may opt for the EF if it is offered. You may ask for it if it isn’t, but in the mean time still must attend a catholic divine worship service every sunday… which generally leaves only the OF.

 

[C_Jackson_35]

Aramis,

In the objective order it is a sin to not fulfill one’s Sunday obligation. Under Church law, generally speaking, attending a Novus Ordo Mass does fulfill one’s Sunday obligation.

However, the way I see it, in the subjective order, if one determines under the guidance of one’s sincere conscience that their only option for Mass on a particular Sunday is a danger to their faith, that person has to obey their conscience. The faith comes before legality. The purpose of the law, the best I can tell, is to give glory and honor to God at least once a week and to honor the Lord’s Day through public worship. If one’s only option for Mass on a Sunday doesn’t do this, then the the law is hardly being fulfilled by attending.

Where to draw the line is a question of one’s formation, knowledge, & disposition. Some who have studied the origins of the New Mass and the theology behind it may have sincere reservations about attending it at all. In that case, in my opinion, objectively they have not fulfilled their Sunday obligation, but subjectively they have not sinned. Sin requires full knowledge and full consent of the will.

That said, I agree that attending a “by the book” NO Mass would not be objectively sinful in and of itself and would fulfill one’s Sunday obligation as it is Mass in a Catholic Rite.

 

[RosaryCrusader]

Isn’t it interesting to see just how many new steps that have been created to dance around this issue, and yet not one poster has given anything but excuses as to why they think it’s ok to attend these illicit Masses…

I thought you were talking about the Novus Ordo at first…

Fact is if I told you I was going to attend a mass full of disobedience, illicit practices, & sacrileges you would probably tell me not to attend and go somewhere else. Yet this is precisely what happens at the NO across the country and people like you, although probably well meaning, turn the other way and make excuses for it. In the meantime you have no qualms at all pointing the finger at the sspx and telling everyone how evil they are. Quit making excuses and be honest with yourself.

I’ve done the same thing my whole life so I know your way of thinking; I’ve looked the other way, made excuses for the irreverence, disobedience, etc. and I realize just how dishonest I’ve been. I’ve had to kill my conscience and bend my intellect backwards to justify the nonsense that’s gone on - and is still going on- and I regret every minute of it.

I went to Post V2 ‘Catholic’ school my whole life and I lost the faith - it wasn’t until an act of God that he converted me back to the faith - not unlike St. Paul. I didn’t deserve it but He chose to save me from myself. Now I look back in horror and I still regret everything - all the sacreligous communions from my very youth! I never knew what I was receiving from my first communion until my conversion when I was 18 years old - there’s “Catholic” education for you!

I regret putting my wife through RCIA when God was calling her to the faith. I thought this was the only way. I was led to believe that in order to become Catholic you had to attend RCIA - foolish me! I shuddered at the thought of her having to attend modernistic classes teaching the ‘faith’ when I myself had to endure diocesan retreats as a youth; it’s there where I’ve heard the most impure stories from boys I bunked with - fellow Catholics. The retreats had absolutely NOTHING to do with the faith but was only intended to tear down your inhibitions and open yourself up like a little pansie to everyone else around you. I told my wife several weeks ago I regret my part of her ever attending RCIA where we were taught we could be ‘eucharist to each other’ since we are the body of Christ and where Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist was equated to that of the spiritual presence of Christ in the ‘assembly’ at Mass and the Word. RCIA, where articles by “SR.” Joan Chittister were freely handed out, eucharistic miracles denied etc… I weep for putting the soul of my wife in danger at such a blasphemous and sacreligious course in nonsense!

For the record I can count the number of times I’ve been to the SSPX on one hand even though they are 15 minutes from my house - I choose to regularly attend the FSSP an hour away - but I do not fault those who attend the SSPX in the least! All this nonsense of them being disobedient is just plain stupid when 99% of your diocesan Priests are just that - DISOBEDIENT! Disobedient to the rubrics, to the magisterium, to the Pope, to the Bishop! Just about everything they do is illicit yet you decide to turn and ignore it and have the audacity to point the finger at people who attend the SSPX as if they’re less than Catholic! You should be ashamed of yourself!

I’ve made a decision; Me and my children will no longer attend the NO - if in the future it means I must attend SSPX exclusively then so be it. The Faith of our Fathers was true 2000 years ago and it’s just as true today! Nobody can change that! Until this age of diabolical disorientation is over we will stay true to the faith of our fathers in union with the Pope and Bishops - but not following them when they venture into the outright nonsensical realm of novelty such as ecumenism, the right to error, dual covenants etc…which have no basis in tradition whatsoever.

Call me what you will but I’m Catholic to the core and I only desire the salvation of my soul and those souls whom Christ has entrusted to me. If this means foregoing a protestantized new order of Mass then so be it. I’m Catholic - not protestant and I don’t want to the be one with protestants through a false ecumenism- rather I want them to be one with Christ in the Church He established for the salvation of their souls.

Our times are not unlike that of St. Athanasius and I think history will bear this out. Think about it for a minute and be honest: Ask yourself, given your current mindset on which side of the fence would you personally be had you lived during the time of St. Athanasius? Your blind obedience to the legitimate Bishops appointed by a legitimate Pope would’ve landed you outside the faith. Think about that. Would you have had the spine to side with a “schismatic” Bishop who dared to enter into other Bishops’ territories to give the faith of our Fathers to the flock? Then look at our current situation where heads of Bishops’ conferences can deny the very nature of Christ’s sacrifice and go unrebuked yet those who only wish to practice the faith prior to the 60’s revolution are spat upon and derided as schismatic, heretic, apostates.

God will decide and I hope everyone is acting in good faith for the good of their own souls. Decieving people is still sinful even if it be to yourself.

Ave Maria!

 

[I_Believe]

I thought you were talking about the Novus Ordo at first…

Fact is if I told you I was going to attend a mass full of disobedience, illicit practices, & sacrileges you would probably tell me …

…God will decide and I hope everyone is acting in good faith for the good of their own souls. Decieving people is still sinful even if it be to yourself.

Ave Maria!

Ya think ?

 

[603304529]

I thought you were talking about the Novus Ordo at first…

Ave Maria!

Nice post.

 

[JustaServant]

In my opinion, the NO Mass is ambiguous and open to heretical interpretation especially when one is mindful of what the NO left out that was previously in the TLM and the theology behind the NO Mass,
Thus while the NO Mass meets the minimum requirements for validity and if its ambiguities are interpreted strictly in accord with Tradition it is not heretical, it is still very dangerous to the faith to attend in my opinion.

Could you be a little more specific? What is it that is ambiguous? What specifically is open to heretical interpretation? What has the NO left out that was in the TLM?

 

[603304529]

Could you be a little more specific? What is it that is ambiguous? What specifically is open to heretical interpretation? What has the NO left out that was in the TLM?

There is no more precise, concise, answer to your question than the Ottaviani Intervention.

Its available on EWTN - google “EWTN Ottaviani Intervention” - you’ll find the full text there.

It is very easy to read, and not very long.

 

[Seamus_L]

If there was no other Latin Mass within a reasonable difference, I’d attend a SSPX Chapel.
It's amazing how people think it's acceptable to receive Communion from a anything goes liberal Catholic parish, or even from an Orthodox priest if he'll let you, but receiving from a SSPX priest is just too scandalous.

 

[bonaventura]

If you love the Holy Father, and Catholic unity, stay away from the SSPX.

Warren

 

[EnchantedEve]

If you love the Holy Father, and Catholic unity, stay away from the SSPX.

Warren

Any particular reason? It appears you are implying SSPX allies do not love the Holy Father or Catholic unity, and we have been over that already!