Y
Yours_Truly
Guest
I was kidding with you because Pope Benedict said the contrary of what Paul VI said.Have you not read SP? Benedict DID say exactly the words I quoted. I’d take his word as to what Paul VI intended over yours.
- Status
L
LilyM
Guest
Well, not EVERYTHING a Pope says by way of comment is infallible, of course. And we all, among the non-infallible commentary, tend to pick and choose that which supports our view at any given time.
I
IrishDude45
Guest
Thanks for the responses! I have decided to at least go and check it out. I will try to talk to the priest there. I will only attend Mass and receive Holy Communion until things improve. I will not go to confession at the FSSPX chapel because I believe the bishop needs to be involved with that sacrament to make it valid? Am I right on that or no? Do I need to confess going to a FSSPX chapel at the moment when I go to confession? is it a venial sin? a sin at all?
L
LilyM
Guest
Yes, confession can only be offered by priests who have valid faculties granted by the bishop of their geographical diocese. Which SSPX priests don’t have.
If your motive in attending an SSPX chapel is love of and desire for the TLM, then you haven’t committed any sin in attending and do not need to confess doing so. Do mention it in confession, though, if you feel you need to for your peace of mind.
Just don’t get too utterly sucked into the criticisms of the Pauline Mass is all. Yes it is far too often abused. Nonetheless, absent these abuses, it DOES, as Benedict XVI points out (and he is as critical of the abuses, and even the Mass itself, as just about anyone), still express exactly the same lex credendi as the TLM.
A
AntiNovusOrdo
Guest
To IrishDude45,
Yes, indeed the rite of confession can be administered validly. They are valid by the fact that the SSPX priests were validly ordained by valid Bishops of the SSPX.Otherwisw if these Bishops did not have valid ordinations, then the priests were not validly ordinated, which is clearly not the case. Rome recognizes the validity of the the ordinations of the Bishops and priests of the Orthodox Church, why then not the SSPX priests? Canon law 1335 states where a latae sententiae censure has not been declared, the prohibihition on celebrating the sacraments is suspended whenever a member of the faithful requests a sacrament or sacramental or an an act of governance “for any just cause”. Pope John Paul 11 did not declare a latae sententiae excommunication against the SSPX priests(just the 6 Bishops). A desire to attend the Traditional Mass which was a right that was established by Pope Saint Pius V and recognized by Pope John Paul 11 is certaintly a just cause. Sound spiritual direction in the confessional for the benefit of owns soul is certaintly a just cause. Needless to say, it is the salvation of souls that is the supreme law of the Church. Hope this helps. Check out Robert Sungenis’ excellent website www.catholicintl.com for more information on the traditionalist movement if you haven’t already. Hope this helps.God be with you.
Yes, indeed the rite of confession can be administered validly. They are valid by the fact that the SSPX priests were validly ordained by valid Bishops of the SSPX.Otherwisw if these Bishops did not have valid ordinations, then the priests were not validly ordinated, which is clearly not the case. Rome recognizes the validity of the the ordinations of the Bishops and priests of the Orthodox Church, why then not the SSPX priests? Canon law 1335 states where a latae sententiae censure has not been declared, the prohibihition on celebrating the sacraments is suspended whenever a member of the faithful requests a sacrament or sacramental or an an act of governance “for any just cause”. Pope John Paul 11 did not declare a latae sententiae excommunication against the SSPX priests(just the 6 Bishops). A desire to attend the Traditional Mass which was a right that was established by Pope Saint Pius V and recognized by Pope John Paul 11 is certaintly a just cause. Sound spiritual direction in the confessional for the benefit of owns soul is certaintly a just cause. Needless to say, it is the salvation of souls that is the supreme law of the Church. Hope this helps. Check out Robert Sungenis’ excellent website www.catholicintl.com for more information on the traditionalist movement if you haven’t already. Hope this helps.God be with you.
L
LilyM
Guest
Wrong. This has nothing to do with the validity of their ordinations. To be able to validly hear confessions TWO things are needed. One, as you say, is valid ordination. That is not an issue with SSPX priests - their ordinations are (as far as I am aware) recognised as valid.
But IN ADDITION to valid ordination a priest needs, under Canon 966, specific faculty granted to be able to hear confessions.
"Can. 966 §1. The valid absolution of sins requires that the minister have, in **addition to **the power of orders, **the faculty of exercising it **for the faithful to whom he imparts absolution.
§2. A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself [for example Cardinals have faculty under Canon 967 to hear confessions anywhere in the world] **or by a grant made by the competent authority **[the local ordinary/bishop]."
NO priest of the SSPX has the necessary grant from their local ordinary. And even a non-SSPX priest would not be permitted to hear confessions without it!
Marriage similarly requires this separate grant of faculty in addition to ordinations. The Eucharist, on the contrary, does not. Neither does baptism.
So the upshot is SSPX priests CAN validly say Mass and baptise, they canNOT validly hear confessions or marry.
And no, Catholics would not be able go to Orthodox priests for confession or marriage EITHER. Orthodox priests ALSO do not have the faculties required!
L
LeroyCRHP
Guest
Would AntiTLM be offensive? I appreciate your apology, but I think we need to keep some consideration with the names on here. Otherwise it is too easy for people to go creating screen names and having multiple log on. Only the mods can tell then by looking at IP addresses. I would suggest a name change to something more positive.
Thanks
Leroy
Thanks
Leroy
A
AntiNovusOrdo
Guest
To LehroyCRHP,
I personally would not be offended if someones screen name was AntiTLM. I figure that as long as someone is not engaging in blasphemy,crude jokes,innuendo,ect., that everything is fair game. Again I am not implying by my name that I am against Catholics who attend the Novus ordo, but rather against the Novus ordo itself. I believe the NO to be a legitimate valid mass, and any Catholic fulfils his or her obligation to God in attending one. And they are not any less holy or Catholic for not attending a TLM. But to be frank about the matter, all things are not equal, and I do feel very strongly that there are many aspects of the NO that are less than desirable. The Traditional mass that the Church has given us for almost 2 millenia has helped foster a deeper reverence for the things of God more so than the NO. So it is the elements in the NO mass itself that can serve to detract or obscure the things which the TLM makes very clear. For instance there is little or no emphasis given in the NO mass to the propitiatory sacrificial act Christs’ death embodied in the Eucharist but instead it is refered to as a “communal meal”. This seems to put more of an emphasis on man rather than on God. The priest facing the people also serves to foster this idea, that it is about us, not God. What this ends up doing if people are not careful about it is that it makes then more susceptible to the humanist philosophy which is the one and only Dogma of this world. And what is the humanist philosophy in a nutshell? That man is the measure of all things. But a society cannot thrive and prosper on this principle as the horrific atrocities of the communist regimes of the 20th and 21st century attest to this fact. In conclusion, I trust that the people on this forum will take my apology in good faith.If they do so, then I think that they are bighearted enough to overlook the seemingly offensive screen name. Peace to all and God bless.
I personally would not be offended if someones screen name was AntiTLM. I figure that as long as someone is not engaging in blasphemy,crude jokes,innuendo,ect., that everything is fair game. Again I am not implying by my name that I am against Catholics who attend the Novus ordo, but rather against the Novus ordo itself. I believe the NO to be a legitimate valid mass, and any Catholic fulfils his or her obligation to God in attending one. And they are not any less holy or Catholic for not attending a TLM. But to be frank about the matter, all things are not equal, and I do feel very strongly that there are many aspects of the NO that are less than desirable. The Traditional mass that the Church has given us for almost 2 millenia has helped foster a deeper reverence for the things of God more so than the NO. So it is the elements in the NO mass itself that can serve to detract or obscure the things which the TLM makes very clear. For instance there is little or no emphasis given in the NO mass to the propitiatory sacrificial act Christs’ death embodied in the Eucharist but instead it is refered to as a “communal meal”. This seems to put more of an emphasis on man rather than on God. The priest facing the people also serves to foster this idea, that it is about us, not God. What this ends up doing if people are not careful about it is that it makes then more susceptible to the humanist philosophy which is the one and only Dogma of this world. And what is the humanist philosophy in a nutshell? That man is the measure of all things. But a society cannot thrive and prosper on this principle as the horrific atrocities of the communist regimes of the 20th and 21st century attest to this fact. In conclusion, I trust that the people on this forum will take my apology in good faith.If they do so, then I think that they are bighearted enough to overlook the seemingly offensive screen name. Peace to all and God bless.
L
LeroyCRHP
Guest
It sounds like pride to question or know better than what the Pope , Priests and 1 billion people around the globe teach and follow (really, “horrific atrocities”). But I don’t know your position, for me I’ll listen to my Priest in my local parish and do the best I can to follow what he teaches. Any sanctioned mass is beautiful to me.
Leroy
Leroy
W
Wintersdemise
Guest
Ya know, I’m currently going through the same dillimna myself. We have a local SSPX chapel in town, whether or not it’s active is another question! I really want to check it out.
The Nouvus Ordo mass lacks the deep sense of the sacred that the Tridentine Mass does. Once, I went to a Liturgy at a Greek Orthodox Church, it was so beautiful and mystical, incense, ect.
This is what I, as a Roman Catholic, would love to be involved in. If other Catholics prefer the New Mass, so be it, good for them! I personally just do not get the same sense of awe from a New Ordo Mass as I do from the Tridentine.
The Latin Mass really makes me feel like God is literally there with you.
The Nouvus Ordo mass lacks the deep sense of the sacred that the Tridentine Mass does. Once, I went to a Liturgy at a Greek Orthodox Church, it was so beautiful and mystical, incense, ect.
This is what I, as a Roman Catholic, would love to be involved in. If other Catholics prefer the New Mass, so be it, good for them! I personally just do not get the same sense of awe from a New Ordo Mass as I do from the Tridentine.
The Latin Mass really makes me feel like God is literally there with you.
L
LilyM
Guest
Whatever makes you feel better.
Personally I thought we were there to worship God in the manner that He instructs us to do so, through the approved liturgies of His church, not for how it makes us feel
Funny that it’s good enough for Christ to be at the Novus Ordo but not for you.
M
maurin
Guest
Well you’ve made your position clear, but why don’t yo try to listen to the moderators, administrators and the thousands of members here. If there were anything inherently offensive about his userid, don’t you think the mods would have, at most, blocked his membership or, at least, asked him to change it?
Incidentally, “Leroy” is the French, “Le Roi”, ‘the king.’ We have no King but Jesus Christ the King. Who is like God, Leroy?
I would suggest you let the mods moderate.
A
AngelaBarbara
Guest
Bless you for being the “soft voice that turns away wrath.” :hug3:
T
Timothysis
Guest
The Mass has nothing to do with how it “really makes (you) feel.” God is “literally there with you” in the Pauline Mass, too.
E
Extempore
Guest
Agreed! So why do we need LifeTeen, liturgical dancers, extraordinary ministers and peppy music?
L
LilyM
Guest
We don’t - any more than we need fiddleback chasubles, Gregorian chant and Latin - none of which Our Lord used, might I add.
E
Extempore
Guest
They do, however, convey an atmosphere of proper solemnity and reverence that the former examples do not.We don’t - any more than we need fiddleback chasubles, Gregorian chant and Latin - none of which Our Lord used, might I add.
L
LilyM
Guest
In your opinion.
In the opinions of others, the LifeTeen, liturgical dancers and peppy music convey an atmosphere of proper joy in the presence of God and His worship (a la the Psalm ‘praise the Lord with cymbals and harps … with timbrel and dance’ etc etc) that the chant and Latin prayers do not.
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed above are not necessarily those of this poster
C
Cluny
Guest
The way that I look at it is this: According to the inffallible teaching of Trent, there is to be only the Latin Mass in perpetuity.
Not true.
If your words were taken at face value as you give them here (and therefore I presume you thus understand them), there would be no Eastern Catholic Churches.
Not true.
If your words were taken at face value as you give them here (and therefore I presume you thus understand them), there would be no Eastern Catholic Churches.
L
LilyM
Guest
It was Pius himself, in Quo Primum, who said these things, not the ‘infallible Council of Trent’. In the interests of accuracy.
Moreover, all Pius said was that the Latin Mass ‘may freely and lawfully be used’ in perpetity, not that it was to be the ONLY form of Mass/liturgy
This is abundantly clear from the fact that even WITHIN the Latin Rite, Pius allowed continuance of the Mozarabic, Ambrosian, Carmelite, Dominican and EVERY other liturgy that was more than 200 years older than the TLM.
- Status