Knights of Columbus and the SSPX

[Stylites]

However, the big question is, what about the third category: Married prior to attending SSPX Masses, **confess to any available priest (SSPX or otherwise), **but regularly attends SSPX Mass on Sunday and Holy Days of Obligation?

I still say it’s a good question for the Supreme Advocate.

As Rich C pointed out, SSPX priests do not have faculties to offer the Sacrament of Reconciliation, so anyone who feigns to confess sins only before an SSPX priest would not be a practical Catholic.

 

[JaMc]

As Rich C pointed out, SSPX priests do not have faculties to offer the Sacrament of Reconciliation, so anyone who feigns to confess sins only before an SSPX priest would not be a practical Catholic.

It could mean that the confession was invalid, which would mean that he would still be in a state of mortal after the confession. However, there’s a difference between being in a state of mortal sin, and not being a practical Catholic. For example, if I sin, my K of C membership isn’t suspended until I go to confession and get absolution. So, I would think that making a potentially ineffective confession would amount to the same thing, unless (a) one did so because one didn’t think a non-SSPX priest could confer absolution; or (b) one did it for a schismatic purpose.

 

[Stylites]

It could mean that the confession was invalid, which would mean that he would still be in a state of mortal after the confession. However, there’s a difference between being in a state of mortal sin, and not being a practical Catholic. For example, if I sin, my K of C membership isn’t suspended until I go to confession and get absolution. So, I would think that making a potentially ineffective confession would amount to the same thing, unless (a) one did so because one didn’t think a non-SSPX priest could confer absolution; or (b) one did it for a schismatic purpose.

Being chronically in a state of mortal sin, say for a full year or more, would not make one a practical Catholic. We are obligated to be in a state of grace at least once a year, during Easter season. Also, the topic was joining the K of C, not what it takes to be removed from the membership rolls.

 

[clem456]

Young man, I’ll have you know that the members of CAF thrive on pointless speculation. It is our very raison d’être.

Why, if it weren’t for pointless speculation, we would all be forced to spend our time reading the Bible or jogging or learning a foreign language or some such nonsense like that.

-Tim-

Thanks for the compliiment!!!

 

[jbarbaretta]

You’re overstepping the Church’s position on Catholics who assist at SSPX chapels, at least according to all the Q&A’s I’ve been able to find online. The Chuch has always considered them to be valid Catholic Masses, though illicit. More recently, the Church has allowed that they fulfill the Sunday obligation, so long as assistance there is not done with a disobedient spirit toward the local ordinary. The failings of SSPX do not fall equally on the laity who assist at their chapels.

In other words, I’m just trying to say that in the eyes of the Church they are practicing, so in the eyes of KofC, they could certainly take a degree in good faith.

Hmmm…I knew that the SSPX laity were treated differently than the SSPX clergy. I was not aware that the SSPX was valid (but illicit) and counted towards the Sunday obligation. That is good for those that attend SSPX Masses.

However, I disagree with your premise that “in the eyes of KofC, they could certainly take a degree in good faith.” Not true. There is still the issue of being “in union with the Holy See”. By the very fact that they attend an SSPX Mass, they are declaring themselves NOT in union with the Holy See.

Maybe, an individual likes things more traditional and has found comfort in the SSPX but does not have an issue with the Pope, Magesterium and Church teachings (e.g. Vatican II). Then, I assume, that would be up to the individual to determine his view of unity with the Holy See and the council to determine if they have an issue with the individual’s stance. That is purely conjecture on my part however.

 

[Rich_C]

Not true. There is still the issue of being “in union with the Holy See”. By the very fact that they attend an SSPX Mass, they are declaring themselves NOT in union with the Holy See.

I won’t de-rail this thread but you’re mistaken. The letter from the Ecclesia Dei commission makes it very clear that going to an SSPX Mass is not an act of disobedience in and of itself; that the intent of the faithful is the distinguishing factor. You shouldn’t state your opinions as fact on CAF, you’ll mislead people.

 

[TrueLight]

There are two councils that I am aware of in NYC that were founded specifically to promote and support the Traditional Latin Mass (Regina Coeli and Agnus Dei).

Father Z touches on these traditional KOC councils a bit here.

 

[TimothyH]

There are two councils that I am aware of in NYC that were founded specifically to promote and support the Traditional Latin Mass (Regina Caeli and Agnus Dei).

Father Z touches on these traditional KOC councils a bit here.

I don’t understand Father’s post. I mean that sincerely, there are things which I don’t understand.

How does one “Sponsor” a Mass?

I thought the knights were about Charity, Unity, Fraternity and Patriotism. Why would councils, at an organizational level, get involved in promoting a particular form of the liturgy? Why would they get involved in “supporting the liturgical renewal Pope Benedict XVI has been trying to initiate” as Father Zuhlsdorf has phrased it?

Were these two councils formed specifically for the purpose of promoting the Tridentine Mass? I find that difficult to understand, given what I know about the knights.

I hope these councils don’t get involved in all this “My Mass is better than your Mass” nonsense and foolishnes. I hope the leadership of these councils remember that unity is one of KofC’s four guiding principals. Father Zuhlsdorf use of the phrase “Traditional Councils” troubles me in that regard. If these councils start using such phraseology to describe themselves, they are going to alienate many of their brothers, many of whom are deacons and priests, and even Cistercian monks!

I’m not asking you personally to answer these questions TrueLight. I’m just putting my thoughts out there. I don’t get it. It seems like Father may be looking at the KofC through his own lense. I’m not a knight so I could be entirely off base.

-Tim-

 

[TrueLight]

I don’t understand Father’s post. I mean that sincerely, there are things which I don’t understand.

I thought the knights were about Charity, Unity, Fraternity and Patriotism. Why would councils, at an organizational level, get involved in promoting a particular form of the liturgy?

Promoting the TLM does not erase charity, unity, fraternity and patriotism. In fact, charity and fraternity compels you to help those in need.

Why would they get involved in “supporting the liturgical renewal Pope Benedict XVI has been trying to initiate” as Father Zuhlsdorf has phrased it?

I hope these councils don’t get involved in all this “My Mass is better than your Mass” nonsense and foolishnes. I hope the leadership of these councils remember that unity is one of KofC’s four guiding principals. Father Zuhlsdorf use of the phrase “Traditional Councils” troubles me in that regard. If these councils start using such phraseology to describe themselves, they are going to alienate many of their brothers, many of whom are deacons and priests, and even Cistercian monks!

I’m not asking you personally to answer these questions TrueLight. I’m just putting my thoughts out there. I don’t get it. It seems like Father may be looking at the KofC through his own lense. I’m not a knight so I could be entirely off base.

-Tim-

Yes, I really cannot answer all of these questions, but I do know whoever they needed to get approval from in the KOC, they did. And that’s what matters.

How does one “Sponsor a mass”?

One can sponsor a mass by providing musicians for chant or priests to celebrate the mass and servers who know how to celebrate the TLM, Priests who often need to travel to celebrate a mass often get a small stipend, as do professional musicians, so there is monetary support as well through fundraising. These are just examples of ways one can sponsor a mass. I am not speaking specifically of those councils as I am not privy to all their activities.

There are parishes who sometimes would like to have a traditional mass, even once, but need help getting one planned. This is one way they can help provide support.

I’m sure the councils also support their parishes in other ways (whatever the Pastor needs), but that is one of their primary missions.

And by the way, if you are able to get more people to attend a dicoesan parish even if they are mostly attending the TLM, then those parishioners/ visitors also provide support to the parish through prayers and monetary offerings.

 

[Rich_C]

I thought the knights were about Charity, Unity, Fraternity and Patriotism. Why would councils, at an organizational level, get involved in promoting a particular form of the liturgy? Why would they get involved in “supporting the liturgical renewal Pope Benedict XVI has been trying to initiate” as Father Zuhlsdorf has phrased it?

Were these two councils formed specifically for the purpose of promoting the Tridentine Mass? I find that difficult to understand, given what I know about the knights.

I hope these councils don’t get involved in all this “My Mass is better than your Mass” nonsense and foolishnes. I hope the leadership of these councils remember that unity is one of KofC’s four guiding principals. Father Zuhlsdorf use of the phrase “Traditional Councils” troubles me in that regard. If these councils start using such phraseology to describe themselves, they are going to alienate many of their brothers, many of whom are deacons and priests, and even Cistercian monks!

-Tim-

It seems unfair to me to take issue with the few councils that support the EF Mass when all the rest support the OF Mass. I know you will say their support of the OF Mass is implicit and inclusive, but many TLM-goers would not feel totally at home there anyway. Maybe you’ll say “that’s their problem.” That would be a double-standard.

That would be saying it’s the trads’ fault if they feel out of place in the average council, and the trads’ fault if other people feel out of place in a trad council. Why is it always the trads’ fault?

Note: I use ‘trad’ for brevity’s sake; I know you dislike labels and I tend to avoid them myself.

 

[Elizium23]

The Knights of Columbus welcome Eastern Catholics as well. We celebrate unity in our diversity. I think with over a billion Catholics in the world, so many people think that the OF is the only game in town, it is only right to promote other forms of Catholic worship, simply so that people understand that they have a choice.

Perhaps the charism that best exemplifies this is Fraternity. In the brotherhood of all Catholics, we find diversity in belief and practice. Remember that fraternal twins are members of the same family, but not identical copies of each other! Certainly, worthy men should not be excluded from the Knights because they are traditionalist, or adhere to the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite. On the contrary, I believe that if there are more Knights who worship in a form other than the Ordinary Form, there would be a wider exposure and acceptance of them, and therefore, unity.

And I’ll note that at last year’s State Convention, we sponsored the Pontifical Masses in the OF in a very real way: we purchased for the bishops all the pontificalia that was seen and used in those Masses. I can see the EF being sponsored in a similar way: it takes money to buy a copy of the Missal, candles, vestments, sacred furnishings. Not all churches are equipped to offer the EF without some financial support. The Knights have the resources to make that possible. Isn’t that a preferable thing? The spread of acceptance and availability of the EF? We can’t expect everyone to love or attend EF Masses, but I believe there are thousands, if not millions of faithful who wish they could, and it is only right for the Knights to try and meet those spiritual needs as best we can.

 

[TimothyH]

Promoting the TLM does not erase charity, unity, fraternity and patriotism. In fact, charity and fraternity compels you to help those in need.

Yes, I really cannot answer all of these questions, but I do know whoever they needed to get approval from in the KOC, they did. And that’s what matters.

One can sponsor a mass by providing musicians for chant or priests to celebrate the mass and servers who know how to celebrate the TLM, Priests who often need to travel to celebrate a mass often get a small stipend, as do professional musicians, so there is monetary support as well through fundraising. These are just examples of ways one can sponsor a mass. I am not speaking specifically of those councils as I am not privy to all their activities.

There are parishes who sometimes would like to have a traditional mass, even once, but need help getting one planned. This is one way they can help provide support.

I’m sure the councils also support their parishes in other ways (whatever the Pastor needs), but that is one of their primary missions.

And by the way, if you are able to get more people to attend a dicoesan parish even if they are mostly attending the TLM, then those parishioners/ visitors also provide support to the parish through prayers and monetary offerings.

Thanks for the reply.

I’m sure there are reaons for these two councils to have been formed other than to promote the Tridentine Mass, just as there are many reasons why a council would be formed at any other parish. At least I hope so. I just hope we don’t get into “Traditional Councils” and “Ordinary Form Councils” and such nonsense. That is my concern.

Father’s blog post seemed to be going in that direction with his use of the phrase “Traditional Council”. I would like to think that the Knights of these councils would have clarified that they are neither traditional, nor non-traditional, but rather just Knights who support the entire church. .

-Tim-

 

[giuseppeTO]

Yes, I am aware of this. I am personally a 3rd degree Knight, and am curious if there are any KofC Councils affiliated with SSPX chapels, and what the Traditionalist’s view is of this organization. That is all.

I am a 3rd Degree Knight and I am in the SSPX. I found a traditional KofC chapter (there are actually two that I know of) that are centered around the E.F.

I asked the GK if it would be a problem being a “remote” member and being associated with the SSPX. He said “no problem”. I have been in this council for 6 years.

I have been disenchanted with the Knights for the last couple of years based on the fact that some prominent politicians, who are Knights, have publicly supported same sex marriage and the funding of Planned Parenthood. As an organization, the Knights have stated that they do not police these sorts of things with their members.

I considered that to be a VERY lame response and not fitting of the reputation of the organization. So I have been seriously reconsidering my membership of late.

Traditionals are leery of the similarities in the rituals of the Knights to Freemasonry but I don’t attend meetings and have not participated in any Knights function for close to 20 years.

 

[jbarbaretta]

Thanks for the reply.

I’m sure there are reaons for these two councils to have been formed other than to promote the Tridentine Mass, just as there are many reasons why a council would be formed at any other parish. At least I hope so. I just hope we don’t get into “Traditional Councils” and “Ordinary Form Councils” and such nonsense. That is my concern.

Father’s blog post seemed to be going in that direction with his use of the phrase “Traditional Council”. I would like to think that the Knights of these councils would have clarified that they are neither traditional, nor non-traditional, but rather just Knights who support the entire church. .

-Tim-

A KofC council would not be set up to “support a Mass” at all. It is there to support the Priests, parish and community. So, I find Father Zs post odd in that as well.

I would like to think that the Knights of these councils would have clarified that they are neither traditional, nor non-traditional, but rather just Knights who support the entire church. .

The Knights of these councils may not be aware that Father Z is calling them out as an example in such a way, and therefore do not know that clarification is needed. Also, it may be that Father Z would not be willing to post a “clarification” on his blog, so if they did want to provide a clarification, it might be hard to find.

…

Someone further up the chain, said that they got whatever permission they needed to support a traditional Mass. That is simply not true. There is no permission needed to support the Church based on any valid rite or form. If a Catholic parish has an EF Mass, and wants the Knights involved or if the Knights asked the pastor for an EF Mass – That is a wonderful thing. Nothing wrong with it at all. The Knights are there to provide whatever support is needed.

The original issue was specifically related to SSPX. I don’t remember Pope Benedict calling for a renewal of SSPX. That is entirely different. I think one of the issues is that people that like the traditional EF Mass seem to think that if you take issue with SSPX you have an issue with the EF of the Mass. That is not true. I actually like it. I don’t go to one very often, but it is a moving Liturgy. I just personally feel that the SSPX went too far.

There are plenty of faithful, “traditionally” minded Catholics who enjoy and promote the EF of the Mass. We are a big Church and there is plenty of room for the various rites and forms that exist. I personally think that it is good to be exposed to as many of these as I can and hope others take the opportunities as they present themselves to do the same.

Let me state that these are my opinions and may not be worth the cost of the bits and bytes used in storing them on the CAF servers. Apparently I tend to be too forceful in my answers.

 

[jbarbaretta]

I won’t de-rail this thread but you’re mistaken. The letter from the Ecclesia Dei commission makes it very clear that going to an SSPX Mass is not an act of disobedience in and of itself; that the intent of the faithful is the distinguishing factor. You shouldn’t state your opinions as fact on CAF, you’ll mislead people.

I apologize for offending you. I did not mean to. However, I did not say that going to an SSPX Mass was an act of disobedience in and of itself. What I said was:

Maybe, an individual likes things more traditional and has found comfort in the SSPX but does not have an issue with the Pope, Magesterium and Church teachings (e.g. Vatican II). Then, I assume, that would be up to the individual to determine his view of unity with the Holy See and the council to determine if they have an issue with the individual’s stance. That is purely conjecture on my part however.

Both agreeing with your premise that the intent is the distinguishing factor and stating that it is “conjecture on my part” rather then fact.

SO, its good to know that we agree.

 

[TrueLight]

A KofC council would not be set up to “support a Mass” at all. It is there to support the Priests, parish and community. So, I find Father Zs post odd in that as well.

Agnus Dei :

Our Council’s Mission Statement says that we are dedicated “to know, love and serve Our Lord Jesus Christ through the promotion of Traditional Catholic Worship and Devotion, through Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy, and service to our Priests and Parishes.” In all of these things, our focus and source of strength is in the Holy Eucharist.

My goal as Grand Knight is to provide opportunities for all our members to grow spiritually as individuals and as a group, through the fellowship of like-minded Catholic men**, by promoting traditional forms of worship (particularly the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite),** through pro-life activism, and by the promotion and support of vocations to the priesthood and religious life.

 

[jbarbaretta]

Agnus Dei Mission Statement:

Our Council’s Mission Statement says that we are dedicated "to know, love and serve Our Lord Jesus Christ through the promotion of Traditional Catholic Worship and Devotion, through Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy, and service to our Priests and Parishes." In all of these things, our focus and source of strength is in the Holy Eucharist.

My goal as Grand Knight is to provide opportunities for all our members to grow spiritually as individuals and as a group, through the fellowship of like-minded Catholic men, by promoting traditional forms of worship (particularly the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite), through pro-life activism, and by the promotion and support of vocations to the priesthood and religious life.

OK, I stand partially corrected. They still were not formed to “support a Mass” The fact that they love and promote the EF of the Mass is a wonderful thing, but their reason for being is to serve the priest and the parish.

That’s a very clear mission statement by the way. I like it.

 

[TrueLight]

OK, I stand partially corrected. They still were not formed to “support a Mass” The fact that they love and promote the EF of the Mass is a wonderful thing, but their reason for being is to serve the priest and the parish.

That’s a very clear mission statement by the way. I like it.

Okay, maybe I used the wrong language when I used the words “formed to support”. I don’t presume to speak for them as I obviously am not part of their council. However, I think Father Z is quite correct…

All I know is that promotion of the Traditional Latin Mass is very important to them. That I can say with no reservations.

And there is nothing wrong with that. Tim.

And of course if anyone is interested in such “traditional councils” and live in NYC, just google them.

 

[jbarbaretta]

…
All I know is that promotion of the Traditional Latin Mass is very important to them. That I can say with no reservations.

And there is nothing wrong with that. Tim.

Absolutely! I agree!

 

[Rich_C]

I apologize for offending you. I did not mean to. However, I did not say that going to an SSPX Mass was an act of disobedience in and of itself.

…Both agreeing with your premise that the intent is the distinguishing factor and stating that it is “conjecture on my part” rather then fact.

SO, its good to know that we agree.

jbarbaretta said:

Not true. There is still the issue of being “in union with the Holy See”. By the very fact that they attend an SSPX Mass, they are declaring themselves NOT in union with the Holy See.

This is what I responded to, as I quoted before. You can clearly see that’s what you said.

But since it seems you didn’t mean it, no hard feelings. I just hate to see good Catholics maligned with the label of “disobedient,” because if you say it enough on the Internet, people will believe it.