Someone explain again why Ecclesia Dei is ignored by friends and members of SSPX?

[paramedicgirl]

What about what God wants?

Matt12:1-7 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, “Look! Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.” He answered, "Haven’t you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread—which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests. Or haven’t you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple desecrate the day and yet are innocent? I tell you that one greater than the temple is here. If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.

People didn’t like the way Jesus was disregarding tradition either. But God changes the rules around. MORALS NEVER CHANGE. But the rules do depending on the times. That’s why there’s a pope to change things around whenever he feels moved to do so. The first Mass was not celebrated exactly like it was in the 1940’s. We didn’t always have 3 groups of mysteries of the rosary (and now 4! :clapping: ) It’s disappointing if you liked the old ways or dislike the new ways, but no excuse to let it drive you away from what you know is right to someplace you know has been deemed wrong.

If you re-read my post, Maria, you will see that I am not in agreement with people running to the SSPX . I am just stating the facts on why it is happening. It’s preventable, if only the priests and bishops would make sure that all the Catholic Masses worldwide are said with reverence.

 

[paramedicgirl]

It’s not about looking down on people. It’s about sticking to the guidelines that have been set out for our Mother Church. I don’t pick who I like based on what church they go to or even if they go to church at all. But it makes me sad when I hear good Catholics are going to invalid Masses.

SSPX Masses are NOT invalid; they are illicit.

Maybe God puts you (generic ‘you’) at a church that is sub-par so that you can help change it. At the church I’m closest to, no one dresses up. People wear shorts, ripped jeans, low-cut shirts and I stick out like a sore thumb wearing a dress. People notice and sometimes they talk about dressing better the next Sunday. We also don’t have adoratation, so I’m working to convince the priest that it’ll improve things. Of course I miss my old church where people showed more respect and where there was more than just daily Mass, but maybe God brought me here not to help me grow so much in my faith but to use me to help others grow in their faith.

So if your church needs help, don’t abandon it! It may take time and be a struggle, but think of the good you can do!

For, some, that experience would cause them to lose their faith. Not everyone is up to the fight. But it’s good that you are able to help in that way.

 

[paramedicgirl]

It’s certainly true that the NO Mass is abused, but what many “traditionalists” regard as an abuse isn’t actually an abuse. For example, many cite VII about the retention of Latin, failing to realize that a pope may go beyond a council. In this case, Pope Paul VI permitted bishops’ conferences in their respective countries to determine to what degree the vernacular would be used. The conferences proposals would then be submitted to the Holy See, along with proposed translations, for approval. So the all-vernacular Mass, hardly called for by VII, has the approval of the Holy See. It cannot, therefore, be called an abuse. It’s the same with altar girls (which I certainly don’t think is a good idea),EMHCs, and communion in the hand (something permitted in the Holy See itself). Yet, “traditionalists” call these abuses of the Mass, things disallowed or reprobated. Not so.

If anyone wants a good chart on the most serious liturgical abuses, here it is:

Tabulation of Most Common and Serious Liturgical Abuses

 

[Uxor]

It’s certainly true that the NO Mass is abused, but what many “traditionalists” regard as an abuse isn’t actually an abuse. For example, many cite VII about the retention of Latin, failing to realize that a pope may go beyond a council. In this case, Pope Paul VI permitted bishops’ conferences in their respective countries to determine to what degree the vernacular would be used. The conferences proposals would then be submitted to the Holy See, along with proposed translations, for approval. So the all-vernacular Mass, hardly called for by VII, has the approval of the Holy See. It cannot, therefore, be called an abuse. It’s the same with altar girls (which I certainly don’t think is a good idea),EMHCs, and communion in the hand (something permitted in the Holy See itself). Yet, “traditionalists” call these abuses of the Mass, things disallowed or reprobated. Not so.

Your quote For example, many cite VII about the retention of Latin, failing to realize that a pope may go beyond a council.

Pope John Paul 1998 Address to the US Bishops

The use of the vernacular has certainly opened up the treasures of the liturgy to all who take part, but this does not mean that the Latin language, and especially the chants which are so superbly adapted to the genius of the Roman Rite, should be wholly abandoned."

Altar girls and Communion in the Hand was permitted by the Holy See? Please provide a source for this.

Halloween and Barney Masses we call abuse.

 

[Uxor]

If anyone wants a good chart on the most serious liturgical abuses, here it is:

Tabulation of Most Common and Serious Liturgical Abuses

Thanks

 

[MariaGorettiGrl]

God does not change rules around…evidence for example the Ten Commandments. In the Old Testament, God gave instructions how His Temple was to be contructed and told how He was to be worshipped. The Traditional Mass is a replica of that.

I think you should re-read the Old Testament before you make that claim. First of all, that would mean that the Taditionalists have a Jewish celebration because Jesus and His sacrifice did not begin the Catholic church until the New Testament.

Secondly, Exodus and Leviticus have chapters and chapters of God telling Moses how he wants to be worshipped. I’ve never heard of an SSPX man offering “to the Lord a sacrifice of cattle, that is, offering of oxen and sheep.” And I’ve never seen an SSPX church with an alter “of setin wood, of two cubits of length, and a cubit in breadth, and a cubit and a half in length” and overlaid “with the purest gold: and thou shalt make to it a golden ledge around it”.

And good Heavens God changed the rules around! That’s why we had the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. When a wife committs adultary, a man doesn’t have to go to church and “offer an oblation for her, the tenth part of barley meal: he shall not pour oil thereon, nor put frankincense upon it”. It’s still wrong to committ adultary, but now you either work it out or get an annulment. Knowing that we are not operating on the rules of the Old Covenant is important! If you accept that Jesus is the Savior and Son of God, then you accept that He is the New Covenant.

 

[MariaGorettiGrl]

It’s preventable, if only the priests and bishops would make sure that all the Catholic Masses worldwide are said with reverence.

You cannot blame the priests and bishops for someone’s decision to leave communion with Rome. Yes, it is discouraging when priests and bishops are lax in their faith. But was not Martin Luther objecting to the laxness of priests and bishps? The whole idea of Protestantism is Protesting the “failure” of the church to properly worhip God. That doesn’t mean we have a right to go to Protestant churches and fulfill our Sunday obligation. At our final judgement, God will not say “You did not stay in communion with my pope, but that’s okay because the priest in your area wasn’t as reverant as he should have been so it isn’t your fault you left.” If I skip Mass, it’s not anyones fault but my own. If I go to an illicit celebration, it’s not anyones fault but mine. If the Mass is so bad at your local church that you do not feel it is meeting the Sunday requirement, then either find another church in your area or move to where there is an acceptable Mass.

 

[MariaGorettiGrl]

SSPX Masses are NOT invalid; they are illicit.

Actually it all depends on who ordained your priest. If you attend a SSPX celebration, you’re taking a chance that you may or may not have the Real Presence. Lefabvre had no authority at the time to ordain the priests he did, therefore their ordination was not valid and they cannot celebrate Mass anymore than I can. I wouldn’t take a chance that I wasn’t receiving Christ!

For, some, that experience would cause them to lose their faith. Not everyone is up to the fight.

All things are possible through Christ who strengthens me!

Mark10:27Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”
God asks us to stay strong in our faith against adversity. He asks us be where there is sin and lack of faith.

Matt10:16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

I’m not denying it’s hard. But God provides!

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Actually it all depends on who ordained your priest. If you attend a SSPX celebration, you’re taking a chance that you may or may not have the Real Presence. Lefabvre had no authority at the time to ordain the priests he did, therefore their ordination was not valid and they cannot celebrate Mass anymore than I can. I wouldn’t take a chance that I wasn’t receiving Christ!

All things are possible through Christ who strengthens me!

Mark10:27Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”
God asks us to stay strong in our faith against adversity. He asks us be where there is sin and lack of faith.

Matt10:16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

I’m not denying it’s hard. But God provides!

Maria: This isn’t the view of the Church. SSPX Masses are considered valid, but illicit (because the priests are suspended ad divinus). Their ordinations are likewise valid, but illicit. Their marriages and absolutions (except in emergencies) ARE invalid because they do not possess the proper faculties for those sacraments (granted by the local ordinary or universally by the pope).

I’m no SSPX supporter, if you go back and look at my postings, you’ll see that. But we need to keep our facts straight.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Your quote For example, many cite VII about the retention of Latin, failing to realize that a pope may go beyond a council.

Pope John Paul 1998 Address to the US Bishops

The use of the vernacular has certainly opened up the treasures of the liturgy to all who take part, but this does not mean that the Latin language, and especially the chants which are so superbly adapted to the genius of the Roman Rite, should be wholly abandoned."

Altar girls and Communion in the Hand was permitted by the Holy See? Please provide a source for this.

Halloween and Barney Masses we call abuse.

Oh, please, this is common knowledge!!! Your fellow “traditionalists” can call the documents up to indict the popes who permitted these things!!! Google it, for pity’s sake.

The pope, in the above address, still did NOT forbid the all-vernacular Mass, approved by his predecessor, so it still isn’t an abuse. I’m not saying Latin SHOULD be abandoned, I’m simply saying that it’s absence doesn’t qualify as an “abuse.”

 

[bear06]

Maria: This isn’t the view of the Church. SSPX Masses are considered valid, but illicit (because the priests are suspended ad divinus). Their ordinations are likewise valid, but illicit. Their marriages and absolutions (except in emergencies) ARE invalid because they do not possess the proper faculties for those sacraments (granted by the local ordinary or universally by the pope).

I’m no SSPX supporter, if you go back and look at my postings, you’ll see that. But we need to keep our facts straight.

I’d have to agree with you Kirk but I’m curious to see what MariaGoretti’s arguments are for this. She didn’t really explain them.

 

[Uxor]

]

I think you should re-read the Old Testament before you make that claim. First of all, that would mean that the Taditionalists have a Jewish celebration because Jesus and His sacrifice did not begin the Catholic church until the New Testament.

Secondly, Exodus and Leviticus have chapters and chapters of God telling Moses how he wants to be worshipped. I’ve never heard of an SSPX man offering “to the Lord a sacrifice of cattle, that is, offering of oxen and sheep.” And I’ve never seen an SSPX church with an alter “of setin wood, of two cubits of length, and a cubit in breadth, and a cubit and a half in length” and overlaid “with the purest gold: and thou shalt make to it a golden ledge around it”.

And good Heavens God changed the rules around! That’s why we had the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. When a wife committs adultary, a man doesn’t have to go to church and “offer an oblation for her, the tenth part of barley meal: he shall not pour oil thereon, nor put frankincense upon it”. It’s still wrong to committ adultary, but now you either work it out or get an annulment. Knowing that we are not operating on the rules of the Old Covenant is important! If you accept that Jesus is the Savior and Son of God, then you accept that He is the New Covenant.

Are you a Catholic? Generally Catholics don’t go around asking if you accept Jesus as your Savior. Not trying to offend just wondering. I wasn’t referring to offering up cattle either.

I was talking about the Exodus…It is spiritual…It was a promised prophecy but also happen in a new way through Christ in Jerusalem during His Passion.

Lk. 9:30-31 And behold, two talked with him, Moses and Elijah, who appeared in glory and spoke of his departure (exodus) which he was to accomplish at Jerusalem.

The Exodus Prophecies…Is 4:5-6 and 11:15-16 and Jer 16:14-15. you can read.

Christ layed down his life during the Jewish liturgical season of Passover.

The night before the first Exodus, Israel had a liturgical feast. This Passover Feast. Read Ex 12:5-7, 12-13, 12-8-10. What happen was a lamb was slaughtered in sacrifice and its blood became the “sign” by which the sons of Israel are spared death, the meat of the lamb is eaten, along with Unleavened bread, together as a community.**

Ex 12:14–>Sacrificial and memorial meal

14 And this day shall be for a memorial to you: and you shall keep it a feast to the Lord in your generations with an everlasting observance.

The first Exodus the night before they left there was a sacrificial meal of the Passover, the new Exodus was done the same way. Christ assembled his disciples in the Upper Room for the feast.

Lk 22:15
15 And he said to them: With desire I have desired to eat this pasch with you, before I suffer.

During the Passover liturgy, Christ for the first time, elevated and transformed and offered His own body and Blood under the appearances of bread and wine. St. John the Baptist, called Christ "the Lamb of God. Christ is the true Passover Lamb whose blood is the saving “sign” which delivered from death, and whose flesh and blood were consumed as the memorial meal.

1 Cor. 5:7-8
7 Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened. For Christ our pasch is sacrificed

The First Mass is a continuation of the essential Passover, but it is not the Jewish Passover because the Lord commanded "do this for a commemoration of me, break with the old

There is alot more to this, but I hope you can understand and see where I’m coming from now.**

 

[Uxor]

Oh, please, this is common knowledge!!! Your fellow “traditionalists” can call the documents up to indict the popes who permitted these things!!! Google it, for pity’s sake.

The pope, in the above address, still did NOT forbid the all-vernacular Mass, approved by his predecessor, so it still isn’t an abuse. I’m not saying Latin SHOULD be abandoned, I’m simply saying that it’s absence doesn’t qualify as an “abuse.”

When did I say it’s absence qualify for an abuse? Quite a few latin masses being said today. I thought from your previous comment you were saying the Pope overrules Vatican II on latin being said. I do quite a bit of posting info, sources thank-you. I believe the person making the claim should provide the source and back up what they say. If you can’t provide me the proof then, I’ll continue to believe that Pope John Paul never approved Communion in the Hand or Altar Girls…

 

[Uxor]

One thing I would like add. some here complain of tradition. That is part of Church teaching, which we must believe.

Christ’s Birth, Death, is part of tradition, Holy Scripture, the Mass, Easter, Christmas, etc. If we did away with tradition we would not have a Church left.

 

[BobP123]

Actually it all depends on who ordained your priest. If you attend a SSPX celebration, you’re taking a chance that you may or may not have the Real Presence. Lefabvre had no authority at the time to ordain the priests he did, therefore their ordination was not valid and they cannot celebrate Mass anymore than I can. I wouldn’t take a chance that I wasn’t receiving Christ!

Actually Rome has acknowledged (implicitly?) that they are valid bishops. In fact, one of the things in their favor is that they would have jurisdiction over priests just like their “in communion” counterparts. They would not have a diocese but would report to the Pope directly. When this happens they will be in “full communion.”

The story is that Lefebrve had asked Rome for approval of these four bishops, but when Rome dragged its feet on the process, he gave them some schpiel about dying and took matters into his own hands and called it “acting out of necessity.” Naturally Pope John Paul II was upset and within a day or two, he came out with this Ecclesia Dei.

In any case, I have never heard that any of the SSPX Masses were invalid. This is the Real Presence and your attendance there does fulfill the 4th Commandment.

Now if you have a schismatic mindset, you would be violating the 1st Commandment. But then you could do that at a non-SSPX event too.

 

[Ham1]

Actually Rome has acknowledged (implicitly?) that they are valid bishops. In fact, one of the things in their favor is that they would have jurisdiction over priests just like their “in communion” counterparts. They would not have a diocese but would report to the Pope directly. When this happens they will be in “full communion.”

The story is that Lefebrve had asked Rome for approval of these four bishops, but when Rome dragged its feet on the process, he gave them some schpiel about dying and took matters into his own hands and called it “acting out of necessity.” Naturally Pope John Paul II was upset and within a day or two, he came out with this Ecclesia Dei.

In any case, I have never heard that any of the SSPX Masses were invalid. This is the Real Presence and your attendance there does fulfill the 4th Commandment.

Now if you have a schismatic mindset, you would be violating the 1st Commandment. But then you could do that at a non-SSPX event too.

They are valid Masses and valid priests. The priests are suspended and, as such, each time they confect the Eucharist they commit a grievious sin. So, if a priest commiting a mortal sin with the Eucharist doesn’t bother you, then I suppose you can attend. I’m not really a big fan.

Attending such a Mass is the same as attending an Orthodox Mass for your obligation. It is not encouraged, but if it is the only Mass available, then it is permissible.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

When did I say it’s absence qualify for an abuse? Quite a few latin masses being said today. I thought from your previous comment you were saying the Pope overrules Vatican II on latin being said. I do quite a bit of posting info, sources thank-you. I believe the person making the claim should provide the source and back up what they say. If you can’t provide me the proof then, I’ll continue to believe that Pope John Paul never approved Communion in the Hand or Altar Girls…

You go right on doing that.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

One thing I would like add. some here complain of tradition. That is part of Church teaching, which we must believe.

Christ’s Birth, Death, is part of tradition, Holy Scripture, the Mass, Easter, Christmas, etc. If we did away with tradition we would not have a Church left.

Who is complaining about tradition?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

When did I say it’s absence qualify for an abuse? Quite a few latin masses being said today. I thought from your previous comment you were saying the Pope overrules Vatican II on latin being said. I do quite a bit of posting info, sources thank-you. I believe the person making the claim should provide the source and back up what they say. If you can’t provide me the proof then, I’ll continue to believe that Pope John Paul never approved Communion in the Hand or Altar Girls…

The Pope DOES overrule the Council, by virtue of his authority on this matter (the use of the language for the Mass is disciplinary) as Supreme Pontiff! You asked Maria Gorretti Girl if she was Catholic, now I ask that of you. That’s pretty basic Catholic doctrine, that popes are not subject to councils (indeed, all conciliar acts have to be ratified by the Pope). The pope allowed the extension of the vernacular.

I’ll provide you links, but in the future, do everyone a favor and do a search of THESE forums, if nothing else:

Communioin in the hand (which, incidentally, the current Holy Father has extended to Poland):

ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm

On altar girls (which, again, I don’t think is a great idea), the decision about which the pope left to local bishops, though no priest can have them forced on him:

ewtn.com/expert/answers/altar_girls.htm

A good read on communion in the hand

matt1618.freeyellow.com/communion.html

 

[Mary_Henley]

Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible

Tradition = BIG T

1. Revealed truths of faith and morals given by Christ or the Holy Spirit to the Apostles and transmitted from them to us without being written in the inspired books of the Bible. The handing down of the truths, as well as the truths themselves, is called tradition. The source of all the truths of tradition is divine revelation, either the actual words of Christ or the revelations of the Holy Spirit sent to the Apostles by Christ. “The Holy Spirit . . . will teach you all things” (John 14:26). The validity of infant baptism is a truth of faith, not revealed in Scripture, but in tradition.
   (C)

CCC Scripture and Tradition =Divine Revelation

126 We can distinguish three stages in the formation of the Gospels:

1. The life and teaching of Jesus. The Church holds firmly that the
   four Gospels, "whose historicity she unhesitatingly affirms, faithfully
   hand on what Jesus, the Son of God, while he lived among men, really did
   and taught for their eternal salvation, until the day when he was taken
   up."99
2. The oral tradition. "For, after the ascension of the Lord, the 76
   apostles handed on to their hearers what he had said and done, but with
   that fuller understanding which they, instructed by the glorious events of
   Christ and enlightened by the Spirit of truth, now enjoyed."100
3. The written Gospels. "The sacred authors, in writing the four 76
   Gospels, selected certain of the many elements which had been handed on,
   either orally or already in written form; others they synthesized or explained
   with an eye to the situation of the churches, while sustaining the
   form of preaching, but always in such a fashion that they have told us the
   honest truth about Jesus."101

little t =changeable traditions
The traditions of liturgy, laws, and practice in the Church in the West, as distinct from the rites and practices of the churches of the East (1203). CCC