Msgr Perl Letters

[Defensor_Fidei]

Do the Perl Letters grant a universal dispensation and why?

Please provide evidence if you are on the affirmative side.

 

[katolik]

There is nothing like a “universal dispensation”. Please defien this.

 

[Defensor_Fidei]

katolik:

There is nothing like a “universal dispensation”. Please defien this.

It’s is the only thing I can think of. Enough people tell me that the Perl letters grants me the right to attend the illicit Masses of the SSPX without penalty, so this opinion must be a universal dispensation.

So you have a better way to expalin this?

-Ted

 

[katolik]

Defensor Fidei:

It’s is the only thing I can think of. Enough people tell me that the Perl letters grants me the right to attend the illicit Masses of the SSPX without penalty, so this opinion must be a universal dispensation.

So you have a better way to expalin this?

-Ted

Is it wrong to attend a Catholic Mass?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

katolik:

Is it wrong to attend a Catholic Mass?

Loaded question.

No it is not wrong to attend a Catholic Mass, but the SSPX are not Catholic.

 

[Defensor_Fidei]

katolik:

Is it wrong to attend a Catholic Mass?

Licit Masses? No.

-Ted

 

[katolik]

ByzCath:

Loaded question.

No it is not wrong to attend a Catholic Mass, but the SSPX are not Catholic.

Then what are they?
They ain’t Protestant.
They ain’t Orthodox.
They ain’t Old Catholic.
They ain’t Jewish.
They ain’t Hindu.
They ain’t Buddhist.
They ain’t Shinto.
They are Catholic but of course.
DO they proclaim all the dogmas of the Holy Roman and Greek Catholic Church? Yes, they do.
They are Catholic.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

katolik:

Then what are they?
They ain’t Protestant.
They ain’t Orthodox.
They ain’t Old Catholic.
They ain’t Jewish.
They ain’t Hindu.
They ain’t Buddhist.
They ain’t Shinto.
They are Catholic but of course.
DO they proclaim all the dogmas of the Holy Roman and Greek Catholic Church? Yes, they do.
They are Catholic.

They are protestant.

They do not proclaim all the dogmas. They refuse to submit themselves to the Holy Father. They refuse to submit to the jurisdiction of the bishop whose diocese they act in.

The grant absolution and annullments with out the right to do so.

They have set themselves up as a Church outside of the Catholic Church.

They deny that the Holy Father has a right to change disicipline.

 

[Defensor_Fidei]

ByzCath:

They are protestant.

They do not proclaim all the dogmas. They refuse to submit themselves to the Holy Father. They refuse to submit to the jurisdiction of the bishop whose diocese they act in.

The grant absolution and annullments with out the right to do so.

They have set themselves up as a Church outside of the Catholic Church.

They deny that the Holy Father has a right to change disicipline.

Most RCs I know, equate protestantism with modernism, instead of protest as it should be.

-Ted

 

[Sean_O_L]

Here are some extracts from some of Mgr. Perl’s communications. For the life of me I cannot see where one can deduce a universal Indult from his writings. On the contrary - I believe that one may only do so out of true necessity - which does NOT mean “preference.”

Communications from Mgr. Camille Perl,
Secretary of PONTIFICIA COMMISSIO ECCLESIA DEI

“…There is no doubt about the validity of the ordination of the priests of the Society of St. Pius X. They are, however, suspended “a divinis”, that is prohibited by the Church from exercising their orders because of their illicit ordination.

“The Masses they celebrate are also valid , but it is considered morally illicit for the faithful to participate in these Masses unless they are physically or morally impeded from participating in a Mass celebrated by a Catholic priest in good standing (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 844.2 ). The fact of not being able to assist at the celebration of the so-called “Tridentine” Mass is not considered a sufficient motive for attending such Masses…

“…’the Hawaiian case’ resulted in a judgment that the former Bishop of Honolulu did not have grounds to excommunicate the persons involved, but this judgment does not confer the Church’s approbation upon the Society of St. Pius X or those who frequent their chapels…”
September 29, 1995

“…While it is true that participation in the Mass at the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself constitute “formal adherence to the schism”, such adherence can come about over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a schismatic mentality which separates itself from the teaching of the Supreme Pontiff and the entire Catholic Church classically exemplified in A Rome and Econe Handbook which states in response to question 14 that

‘the SSPX defends the traditional catechisms and therefore the Old Mass, and so attacks the Novus Ordo, the Second Vatican Council and the New Catechism, all of which more or less undermine our unchangeable Catholic faith.’

“It is precisely because of this schismatic mentality that this Pontifical Commission has consistently discouraged the faithful from attending Masses celebrated under the aegis **of the Society of St. Pius X. **

“…the Code of Canon Law defines schism as " refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff OR of communion with the members of the Church subject to him " (canon 751). The above citation together with the other documentation which you have included in your dossier and your own exchange of correspondence with Father Violette clearly indicate the extent to which many in authority in the Society of St. Pius X corroborate that definition.

“…the documentation which you have submitted witnesses to a consistent condemnation of the new Mass, the Pope and anyone who disagrees with the authorities of the Society in the smallest degree. Such **behaviour is not consistent with the practice of the Catholic faith.” **
October, 27, 1998

“…The celebration of the Mass should be done by a priest who is in union with the Church. Attendance at Masses celebrated by other priests is permitted only where access to a Mass celebrated by a priest in union with the Church is impossible. Now, the priests of the FSSPX are not in union with the Church because of their adherence to the schism of Archbishop LeFebvre who provoked the schism by his ordination of some bishops contrary to the will of the Pope, who has called the act on 30 June 1988 as schismatic…”
Apr. 15, 2002

"You also state in your letter that the Holy Father has given you a ‘right’ to the Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. This is not correct. It is true that he has asked his brother Bishops to be generous in providing for the celebration of this Mass, but he has not stated that it is a ‘right’. Presently it constitutes an exception to the Church’s law and may be granted when the local Bishop judges it to be a valid pastoral service and when he has the priests who are available to celebrate it.

Every Catholic has a right to the sacraments (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 843), but he **does not have a right to them according to the rite of his choice." **
January 18, 2003

Greater extracts and the full documents may ve viewed in the following links:

Refer Extracts from Ecclesiastical Documents on the Schism and Excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre and SSPX
[URP=[URL]http://jloughnan.tripod.com/schmex2.htm[/URL] ] Ecclesiastical Documents on the Schism and Excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre and SSPX

 

[otm]

katolik:

Then what are they?
They ain’t Protestant.
They ain’t Orthodox.
They ain’t Old Catholic.
They ain’t Jewish.
They ain’t Hindu.
They ain’t Buddhist.
They ain’t Shinto.
They are Catholic but of course.
DO they proclaim all the dogmas of the Holy Roman and Greek Catholic Church? Yes, they do.
They are Catholic.

Try shizmatic for size.