Schismatic Liturgy vs. Catholic Communion Service

[David_B]

Suppose you live somewhere, most likely a rural area, where the local parish very infrequently has scheduled Masses, perhaps once a month or less, and Sunday Mass is substituted with a Lay or Deacon led Communion Service.

If I were faced with such a situation, I think I would try to attend an Eastern Orthodox or Society of St. Pius X Chapel if it were availible nearby to participate in a Eucharistic Liturgy. I would make clear to the priest that I was a Catholic in full communion with the Holy Father, and that I accepted the reforms of Vatican II. If they would not allow me to receive communion I still might attend to participate at a sacred liturgy but maybe drop by the Communion Service to receive our Lord.

 

[m134e5]

I voted “other”. For Sunday liturgy, I would go to an SSPX Mass over a communion service. I would not recieve communion there. I would go to a communion service in addition to the SSPX Mass, to recieve communion.

 

[Iohannes]

unavoce.org/articles/2003/perl-011803.htm

This is by Monsignor Perl whom Pope John Paul II appointed:

“1. In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.”

His second question was “Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass” and we responded stating:

“2. We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin.”

His third question was: “Is it a sin for me to contribute to the Sunday collection a Pius X Mass” to which we responded:

“3. It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified.”

 

[A.Pelliccio]

I will not set foot in another “place of worship” outside of a Catholic church.

 

[David_B]

I should clarify that the third option, " All Liturgies with the Eucharist (EX:former priest turned married Lutheran Minister)" simply means that you would attend a liturgy celebrated by a validly ordained priest, but might be more properly (or maybe unpolitically correct) as a heretic, such as the case of a priest that left the church to get married.

This might also apply to Anglican priests who were ordained by Old Catholic bishops.

 

[Psalm45_9]

The only time I would go to a church not in union with the Pope. Is if it were Sunday and I was in Russia (where there’s like no Catholic Churches, Eastern or Latin Rite), then I would attend the Divine Liturgy at a Russian Orthodox Church and I certainly would not even attempt to recieve communion.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I would attend the Communion service, provided it was licit re: the bishop. I wouldn’t go to the SSPX at all, unless for a wedding or a funeral. I would not rec. Holy Communion there, though I do not doubt it’s validity, but rather, I’m aware of its illicitness (NONE of their priests have sacerdotal faculties granted by a legitimate ordinary, which renders their sacramental actions valid, but illicit) and I don’t want to contribute, by either my presence or my money,to schismatic disobedience. Monsignor Perl notwithstanding, they are in schism until the Pope says they aren’t.

 

[bear06]

unavoce.org/articles/2003/perl-011803.htm

This is by Monsignor Perl whom Pope John Paul II appointed:

Here we go again! As Msgr. Perl stated, this was sent to a specific person in a specific circumstance and we’ll never, apparently, be shown the original letter sent to Msgr. Perl with the question on this issue. This should reaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllllyyyyyyyyyy make you think. If this answer from Msgr. Perl is the great “a-ha!” then you’d think that they might be a little more forthright with the original question.

 

[kmktexas]

I voted “other” and would not attend any of those services. I don’t think there is still a Sunday Mass obligation when there isn’t a Mass in Communion with Rome available. There is no obligation to receive Communion so I certainly wouldn’t go to a schismatic Mass in order to receive.

As long as there is a parish and sometimes a Mass, I would hold out for that. In the meantime, maybe catch Mass on EWTN and make a spiritual Communion.

If the situation was prolonged and there was no reasonable chance of a Mass in the near future, I would go to the EO service but not receive there since I think that Latin Rite Catholics can only receive at EO liturgies is Communion is not available regardless of whether Mass is available.

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

I’d move.

Anna

 

[Adonis33]

bear06:

Here we go again! As Msgr. Perl stated, this was sent to a specific person in a specific circumstance and we’ll never, apparently, be shown the original letter sent to Msgr. Perl with the question on this issue. This should reaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllllyyyyyyyyyy make you think. If this answer from Msgr. Perl is the great “a-ha!” then you’d think that they might be a little more forthright with the original question.

You are correct in saying as you did - however I believe that when the letter was made public - Msgr. Perl clarified the statement for the public. (correct me if I am wrong)

 

[JOHNYJ]

First, It is insulting to equate the E O with the lefenvreist heretics. Most believe that the lefebvreists were Schismatics to start but have gone beyond that to heresy.
No Catholic worth the name would support people who deny the legitimacy of the last 5 Popes.
Let us not forget the decree of Excommnication. That hangs over the head of anyone supporting these renegades !

 

[bear06]

Adonis33:

You are correct in saying as you did - however I believe that when the letter was made public - Msgr. Perl clarified the statement for the public. (correct me if I am wrong)

Msgr. Perl clarified that the letter was to a specific person in a specific circumstance but those who would like to say that SSPX fulfills Sunday obligation never tell you that Msgr. Perl clarified anything.

As for the original letter to the Ecclesia Dei Commission, we’ve never seen it to my knowledge.

 

[Iohannes]

bear06:

Here we go again! As Msgr. Perl stated, this was sent to a specific person in a specific circumstance and we’ll never, apparently, be shown the original letter sent to Msgr. Perl with the question on this issue. This should reaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllllyyyyyyyyyy make you think. If this answer from Msgr. Perl is the great “a-ha!” then you’d think that they might be a little more forthright with the original question.

No, the letter was made public. Why would this specific person be more special than any of us? Is he more holier or of royal blood? I know what this letter means.

If you want to find out more contact Dr. John Rao, any of the people in Charge of Una Voce.
fiuv.org/en/2.asp

 

[Iohannes]

JOHNYJ:

First, It is insulting to equate the E O with the lefenvreist heretics. Most believe that the lefebvreists were Schismatics to start but have gone beyond that to heresy.
No Catholic worth the name would support people who deny the legitimacy of the last 5 Popes.
Let us not forget the decree of Excommnication. That hangs over the head of anyone supporting these renegades !

Can you define a heresy of SSPX? What formal Heresy do they have?

Eastern Orthodox deny papal infallibitily, and the Filloque, SSPX do not.

the SSPX are not sedevacantist. They are disobeident but not sedevacantist.

 

[twiztedseraph]

David B:

Suppose you live somewhere, most likely a rural area, where the local parish very infrequently has scheduled Masses, perhaps once a month or less, and Sunday Mass is substituted with a Lay or Deacon led Communion Service.

If I were faced with such a situation, I think I would try to attend an Eastern Orthodox or Society of St. Pius X Chapel if it were availible nearby to participate in a Eucharistic Liturgy. I would make clear to the priest that I was a Catholic in full communion with the Holy Father, and that I accepted the reforms of Vatican II. If they would not allow me to receive communion I still might attend to participate at a sacred liturgy but maybe drop by the Communion Service to receive our Lord.

But thats tantamount to going to an orangemen meeting and swearing your Catholic. To recive communion is a sign of unity. Why not just do the nice, sane, orthodox Catholic thing and stick to your Parish which is in Communion with the Vicar of Christ?

 

[Petertherock]

I have in fact attended a communion service by a deacon on a Sunday. As I posted in another thread earlier, our normal priest was on vacation and our fill in priest was sick and couldn’t make it. So our deacon had a communion service. Our deacon stated that this service did indeed count as fullfilling your Sunday obligation. He also stated as we have fewer priests this is what we will be facing in the future.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

A.Pelliccio:

I will not set foot in another “place of worship” outside of a Catholic church.

Agreed. And that includes the SSPX. In a communion service, the host are (or should of been) consecrated already. You are receiving Christ. You cannon receive that in a non-Catholic Liturgy.

PF

 

[Triumpha]

JOHNYJ:

First, It is insulting to equate the E O with the lefenvreist heretics. Most believe that the lefebvreists were Schismatics to start but have gone beyond that to heresy.
No Catholic worth the name would support people who deny the legitimacy of the last 5 Popes.
Let us not forget the decree of Excommnication. That hangs over the head of anyone supporting these renegades !

The SSPX doesn’t deny the legitimacy of the alst 5 Popes. Their priests pray for the present Pope and the diocesan bishop in the Canon of the Mass.

The insult is to the SSPX to be compared with the “Orthodox”,

The Eastern Orthodox are definitely schismatics (and possibly heretics, since there are more differences between Catholicism and “Orthodoxy” than just the Pope and filioque. There’s the matter of divorce and remarriage, and other beliefs I read sometime ago but can’t recall at present).

Excommunications have been known to be unjust in the past. They aren’t infallible.

Triumpha.

 

[Iohannes]

WanderAimlessly:

Agreed. And that includes the SSPX. In a communion service, the host are (or should of been) consecrated already. You are receiving Christ. You cannon receive that in a non-Catholic Liturgy.

PF

There is no Sacrifice and no grace that would have been recieve if there was a Sacrifice. At least at an SSPX you could recieve grace if the intention is not to break from Rome.