Latin Mass for Dummies?

[Frank_Roman]

TNT:

Just so you are sure:

I’m damned either way I go…from 2 “catholics”.

Yeah, but just make sure God doesn’t damn you. Stay away from SSPX. Get your wife out of there. FSSP is the way to go.

 

[Dropper]

Frank Roman:

Yeah, but just make sure God doesn’t damn you. Stay away from SSPX. Get your wife out of there. FSSP is the way to go.

Just curious. Why stay away from the SSPX? They seem to be a fine group of good and holy men trying to stand up for Tradition in today’s Church.

Msgr. Perl has said that we may assist at an SSPX Mass to fulfill one’s Sunday obligation. He has also stated that we may assist them financially.

Just so you know, I assist at an FSSP paish in my diocese, but it seems to me some seem to go to far in criticising the SSPX.

 

[bear06]

Dropper:

Just curious. Why stay away from the SSPX? They seem to be a fine group of good and holy men trying to stand up for Tradition in today’s Church.

Msgr. Perl has said that we may assist at an SSPX Mass to fulfill one’s Sunday obligation. He has also stated that we may assist them financially.

Just so you know, I assist at an FSSP paish in my diocese, but it seems to me some seem to go to far in criticising the SSPX.

OK, here’s where I go “NO! NO! NO!” Msgr. Perl said that one individual may satisfy his Sunday obligation at a chapel. He did not say that this fulfills everyone’s Sunday obligation. Msgr. Perl made it very clear in a subsequent letter that his originaly response was made to one individual in a certain circumstance. Once again, they have been caught in a half-truth! We will never know what the original questioner asked Msgr. Perl because this letter has never been published despite the response being spread far and wide. If the original letter said something similar to “I am crippled and live next door to a chapel and have no other way to get to an approved Mass but a nice young fellow is willing to take me to the chapel. Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation at this chapel?” Of course the Church would say “yes” because the Church always provides for those in impossible situations. In case of death, the SSPX priest would also validly hear confessions where they wouldn’t normally have the faculties (and these are necessary for valid confessions).

As for them being a fine group of men…read Ecclesia Dei, Pastor Aeternus, Mediator Dei and remember that all that glitters is not gold!

 

[TNT]

Scotty PGH:

Just out of curiosity, where do you attend Mass? The local indult? With your wife?

Her, SSPX always.
Me, SSPX weekdays, Indult on Sunday…the day of Obligation…ECUMENISM makes me do it!

Once in about 6 weeks she’ll go to the Sunday indult…Then turn right around and go to the later in the day SSPX.

 

[TNT]

bear06:

OK, here’s where I go “NO! NO! NO!” … Msgr. Perl made it very clear in a subsequent letter that his originally response was made to one individual in a certain circumstance. …

GOOD, you at least admit that there is a circumstance that makes the SSPX mass both VALID and LICIT.

Even if you can’t, and Perl won’t say, WHAT that mysterious circumstance(s) might be.

Why does he not just tell us the circumstance(s)? Why the secrecy?
Oh, I know…it will be “abused”…if only “abuse” was more an issue on the rest of the “permissions”…altar girls…EM’s ad infinitum…homosexual seminarians…blah blah…

ps.
NO, Wifey wanted the Angelus Missal even though BOTH are available at the SSPX bookstore.
Thanks for asking…love ya anyway. I’m just a furry teddy bear…

 

[Scotty_PGH]

TNT:

ECUMENISM makes me do it!

 

[bear06]

GOOD, you at least admit that there is a circumstance that makes the SSPX mass both VALID and LICIT.

I don’t think that’s quite what I said. It’s still an illicit mass and I don’t think I ever said that it was invalid. It would only fulfill Sunday obligation when it falls under the Vatican’s definition (not SSPX’s) of necessity and they have clearly said that there is no necessity just based on the fact that there are no other accessible Tridentine Masses.

I can think of a few other places that have a valid eucharist where one might fulfill their Sunday obligations if there are no other Catholic (that is, again, according to the Vatican’s definition) Masses available. Correct? This is no way makes it right to attend these masses just because you don’t like the church in your area.

 

[dumspirospero]

I go to the TLM most of the time…but I love the Novus Ordo just as much…I am just nostalgic…I was very confused at first, because as a convert…I had nobody to go to the TLM with…it was just Jesus and I I bought various books by Archbishop Fulton Sheen, etc…I bought a few English/Latin Missals…I bought books on Latin etc…It was a hobby for me to learn every detail of the Mass…after several weeks, I got to where I could follow along precisely…I felt great. I still have more to learn…but I have all the time in the world…THere are little clues in the TLM to help you keep up with where you are, such as the position of the Priest…whether the Altar Missal is on the Epistle side or Gospel side…bells, etc…The TLM is the best experience this side of Heaven…I love to go every chance I get.

Vivat Jesus, Sonny

 

[TNT]

bear06:

I don’t think that’s quite what I said. It’s still an illicit mass … It would only fulfill Sunday obligation when it falls under the Vatican’s definition … of necessity …
…

Ok, according to you it is illicit, but can be licit. When, exactly is it licit??

That’s the WHOLE point!
ie
What ARE the conditions that were approved in Perl’s letter? Then we can have some certainty on those conditions specifically! That’s all I want…the CONDITIONS that make it licit. Why the BIG secret?

After all, I can hardly imagine the person stating that a NOM Mass is inaccessible but the SSPX is, unless of course the NOM is only being said at the mouth of an active volcano.

For giudance, then what ARE the conditions… I travel to some distance places, even Hawaii, but the NOM has always been nearby.

I want to know the conditions that prompted Perl to OK the SSPX as Sunday obligation.

remember that all that glitters is not gold!

Same for NOM services.

 

[bear06]

Ok, according to you it is illicit, but can be licit. When, exactly is it licit??

T, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? The SSPX Mass is illicit. You can fulfill your Sunday obligations in extreme situations even if it is illicit. Just because the Church provides for the impossible situation (even though EXTREMELY rare) it doesn’t mean the SSPX Mass is suddenly licit. Your reason for going there could be though.

What ARE the conditions that were approved in Perl’s letter? Then we can have some certainty on those conditions specifically! That’s all I want…the CONDITIONS that make it licit. Why the BIG secret?

There’s no secret. Canon law spells it out perfectly and it’s pretty much the same (although there are some subtle differences) with the Orthodox churches. Maybe Pete can explain it better: sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id2.html

After all, I can hardly imagine the person stating that a NOM Mass is inaccessible but the SSPX is, unless of course the NOM is only being said at the mouth of an active volcano.

I can come up with a few different reasons. Thanks for the volcano one! The letter to Msgr. Perl was a cleverly designed trap. “Of course the Church will provide for impossible situations so let’s throw them one and when they respond we’ll use it as our smoking gun. Nobody will realize that they never saw the original query and that even though we spread the answer far and wide, we won’t them the original letter.” Give me a break. This is sooooooooooooooooo plain obvious. Don’t you ever ask yourself why we’ve seen the response sooooooooooooo many times but the original letter has never shown up? This has got to bug you!!!

I want to know the conditions that prompted Perl to OK the SSPX as Sunday obligation.

So do I! I’m sure it was stolen by some Mason and will materialize in his briefcase as he lay dying, all alone, in a hospital.

 

[Iohannes]

bear06:

Angelus Press is the printing wing of SSPX. Please do not order from them. If you would like a Latin-English missal here’s where you can get one baroniuspress.com/missal…our_edition.htm

Also, I have a book from the Coalition in Support of Ecclesia Dei I got a few years back called Know Your Mass. They bill it as "an illustrated manual of instruction on the Tradtiional Mass in Latin for Catholics young and old. Don’t see it on their site but you could always call them.

Do you watch TV? Do you buy protestant music?

 

[Iohannes]

bear06:

OK, here’s where I go “NO! NO! NO!” Msgr. Perl said that one individual may satisfy his Sunday obligation at a chapel. He did not say that this fulfills everyone’s Sunday obligation. Msgr. Perl made it very clear in a subsequent letter that his originaly response was made to one individual in a certain circumstance. Once again, they have been caught in a half-truth! We will never know what the original questioner asked Msgr. Perl because this letter has never been published despite the response being spread far and wide. If the original letter said something similar to “I am crippled and live next door to a chapel and have no other way to get to an approved Mass but a nice young fellow is willing to take me to the chapel. Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation at this chapel?” Of course the Church would say “yes” because the Church always provides for those in impossible situations. In case of death, the SSPX priest would also validly hear confessions where they wouldn’t normally have the faculties (and these are necessary for valid confessions).

As for them being a fine group of men…read Ecclesia Dei, Pastor Aeternus, Mediator Dei and remember that all that glitters is not gold!

What makes that one person more special than me? Is he blue blood. Why does he get to go to an SSPX chapel and not everyone else?

 

[Iohannes]

Pope Benedict XVI said that we must be ecumenical, so we should be ecumenical towards the SSPX.

After didn’t all, Lumen Gentium said the Christ’s Church subsist in the Catholic Church???

 

[bear06]

Iohannes:

Do you watch TV? Do you buy protestant music?

Please. You’re actually equating this with the SSPX? Can you possibly show me a Church document pre or post VII that says we shouldn’t listen to protestant music (I’m pretty sure there were many classical composers who weren’t Catholic) or watch TV. You’re stretching here. I would agree that you should never watch anything or listen to anything actively trying to lead you away from the Magisterium of the Church.

 

[bear06]

Iohannes:

What makes that one person more special than me? Is he blue blood. Why does he get to go to an SSPX chapel and not everyone else?

Have you actually read the posts? I gave one example right there although we’ll probably never know if it was the right one because the original author apparently doesn’t want the situation known.

 

[bear06]

Iohannes:

Pope Benedict XVI said that we must be ecumenical, so we should be ecumenical towards the SSPX.

After didn’t all, Lumen Gentium said the Christ’s Church subsist in the Catholic Church???

I’m all for it. Do you actually think that ecumenical means denying the truths of the Church. It’s pretty funny that ecumenism is such a dirty word to some people. Pre-VII popes spoke of it. There’s nothing wrong with ecumenism, just false ecumenism. Is the above a heretical statement? You’re darned either way here. If you say yes, you’re accusing the Vatican of teaching a heresy in a matter of Faith. If you say know, then what’s the problem?

 

[TNT]

bear06:

T, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? The SSPX Mass is illicit. You can fulfill your Sunday obligations in extreme situations even if it is illicit. …

My understanding also is that illicit means, and only means, illegal or (more directly from the Latin) not permitted. Not permitted by whom? By he who has the authority. Who has the authority? The Pope and the bishops in union with him.

Now, if it is permitted by Perl in a paticular instance, * then in that instance, it became “permitted” ie became licit. That is the reason he said it fulfilled the obligation…the “not pemitted—illegal” aka illicit was suspended.
So yes, theie was a situation that made it LICIT. We do not know if it was founded on an “impossiblity” of attending NOM.

I could speculate with some of Perl’s statement, that it depended on that person’s disposition toward a schismatic position…whether they opined that the VATII and the NOM were licit or not.
In other words, were they attending but not supporting these opinions of the SSPX.*

 

[chris_ZA]

I do not know is this is available in the US but Sheed and Ward published a book by Msgn. Ronald Knox (of the Knox translation fame) called “The Mass in Slow Motion”. It is based on a series of sermons he gave to girls at a Convent School during WWII.

Also good is his explanation of the Creed called the “Creed in Slow Motion”

You may also want to try and find “This is the Mass” by Archbishop Fulton Sheen. Should be available in the US. This is filled with beautiful photographs and is part of the “This is” series. Other titles were “This is Rome” and this is the “Holy Land”

Hope this is what you are looking for.

Christopher.

 

[Iohannes]

bear06:

I’m all for it. Do you actually think that ecumenical means denying the truths of the Church. It’s pretty funny that ecumenism is such a dirty word to some people. Pre-VII popes spoke of it. There’s nothing wrong with ecumenism, just false ecumenism. Is the above a heretical statement? You’re darned either way here. If you say yes, you’re accusing the Vatican of teaching a heresy in a matter of Faith. If you say know, then what’s the problem?

What does ecumenism mean? Too many answers.

 

[Mummybee]

chris ZA:

I do not know is this is available in the US but Sheed and Ward published a book by Msgn. Ronald Knox (of the Knox translation fame) called “The Mass in Slow Motion”. It is based on a series of sermons he gave to girls at a Convent School during WWII.

Also good is his explanation of the Creed called the “Creed in Slow Motion”

You may also want to try and find “This is the Mass” by Archbishop Fulton Sheen. Should be available in the US. This is filled with beautiful photographs and is part of the “This is” series. Other titles were “This is Rome” and this is the “Holy Land”

Hope this is what you are looking for.

Christopher.

Thanks, Christopher! Great suggestions! I’ll look for them at Immaculata.