SSPX Bishop to Elevate Monastery?

[Pregustator]

The SSPX priests are, of course, a great source for not only saying the Latin Mass but also for training other priests.

Despite the things about the SSPX that aren’t right, I cannot argue with you there. If they were within the fabric of the Church, both legally and in spirit, they would certainly be the ones to turn to for that purpose. No argument there.

Uh, who is “snubbing their nose at the Holy See”?
I see the many diocesan bishops and clergy who have for the past forty plus years been destroying our liturgy and vandalizing our church buildings as the ones who are “snubbing their nose at the Holy See”. These are the same ones who have made it so unworkable for folks to “find(ing) those parishes and chapels that celebrate the TLM licitly”. It is hard to find what does not exist in many of our dioceses.

Well, I have to say you actually make a very good point. I suppose if I’m going to lay the charge of rebellion at the feet of the SSPX, the same could be said of many diocesan priests and even some bishops. I think we’re talking a question of degree, however. I don’t think a bishop who permits, for example, glassware on the altar, or who discourages the offering of the Tridentine liturgy in his diocese, in spite of a Vatican which has given contrary instructions, is disobedient to the same degree as a group of renegade bishops assuming for themselves the prerogatives of ordinary bishops.

 

[ProVobis]

In order for what you suggest to happen, SSPX needs to drop all pretext of crisis and accept Vatican II as well as OF and the fact that OF will in fact, remain OF.

Pot, kettle. Seems like the OF communities are the ones who haven’t accepted (or have found loopholes on) Vatican II’s teachings on Latin, Gregorian chant, the organ, etc.

 

[StTommyMore]

Here is one who has brought it up.
From your perspective in a Latin Rite parish, perhaps it is hard to grasp that there are a whole heck of a lot of padres out there, who have never had a Latin class, much less even seen a Latin Mass. (Canon #249 provisions requiring seminarians to be “well versed in Latin” notwithstanding).
BTW you might look around and take note how many parishes there are which don’t even have a regularly scheduled Benediction.

In every pre-theoligate program, a significant amount of Latin is required. The one I am looking at requires 3 semesters of Ecclesial Latin.

 

[crazzeto]

What percentage of Masses in the diocese have ANY Latin in the Mass, including a choir-sung Latin hymn? And what did Vatican II say about perserving Latin in the Latin Rite?

The percentage appropraite to the number of parishiners actually seeking out the Latin Mass. The Diocese has done it’s best to promote the Mass, but as always Holy Mother Church needs our help promoting not just the Latin Mass, but promoting a complete revitalization of a Catholic Culture in the USA. Bishop Burbage has put a lot of time and effort into it, but he’s one man. I wouldn’t be shocked if the same was true in your own diocese. I would suggest this, check out the website for your diocese, and perhaps your cathedral parish and see what is offered. Is there a (non) SSPX latin mass available to you? If so, SUPPORT IT!!! You can’t expect your Bishop alone to make people want to attend mass in Latin. Frankly, I suspect exhortations from your bishop would go in one ear and out the other, due to fears of “not understanding anything”.

Rather I would spend time talking to your fellow parishoners, explain to them how quickly and easily one can get into the swing of things (esp with a dirt cheap 1962 missal on hand). Your parishoners need to hear from their fellow parishoners that Latin Mass is a good thing. I’m afraid that people these days tend to write of what their Priests and Bishops have to say.

 

[Pregustator]

In order for what you suggest to happen, SSPX needs to drop all pretext of crisis and accept Vatican II as well as OF and the fact that OF will in fact, remain OF.

I would say they don’t have to like it but they’ll have to learn to live with the fact that it’s here for the moment, at least. What they have to do is not embrace the Vatican II liturgy, however, but stop acting like schismatics.

You can be a faithful Roman Catholic loyal to the pope and refuse to attend or celebrate the ordinary form of Mass. But you can’t be a faithful Roman Catholic loyal to the pope and disobey the pope, ignore the Holy See, and assume for yourself the authority of an ordinary jurisdiction that you haven’t got. That’s what you can’t do.

 

[Pregustator]

First, you said it has disappeared “from the Liturgy.” Benediction is Liturgy.

Benediction is most certainly not liturgy. Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament is a paraliturgical devotion. It is not part of the liturgy of the Church.

 

[StTommyMore]

Benediction is most certainly not liturgy. Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament is a paraliturgical devotion. It is not part of the liturgy of the Church.

It IS Liturgy. As is Litugy of the Hours (which is not reserved to the Priesthood). Liturgy is not restricted to Mass.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I think this thread has gotten way of topic.

 

[Pregustator]

It IS Liturgy.

No, no, no, it is not, my quite mistaken friend. The Divine Office and the Mass make up the liturgy–the public prayer of the Church. Benediction forms no part whatsoever of the liturgy. Look it up. You’ll discover you are mistaken.

 

[ProVobis]

I’m afraid that people these days tend to write of what their Priests and Bishops have to say.

But at the same time, people still have favorites amongst priests and won’t attend where they dislike the priests. So it is up to the priests. If their favorite priest/sermonist were to have in Gloria in Latin on one Sunday per month in a Spanish-English hybrid, for example, would you have mass exodus to another parish?

 

[Pregustator]

I think this thread has gotten way of topic.

Yes, like all the others.

Getting back to the original topic, however, are there any SSPX supporters monitoring this conversation who are able to supply the Society’s rationale behind Bishop de Galarreta’s impending elevation of Our Lady of Guadelupe Monastery to the level of conventual priory?

How, in fact, does the SSPX justify this action? Whence do they claim to derive the authority to send one of their bishops to do such a thing? And I’m asking for the real answer, not something pulled out of one’s derriere.

 

[crazzeto]

I would say they don’t have to like it but they’ll have to learn to live with the fact that it’s here for the moment, at least. What they have to do is not embrace the Vatican II liturgy, however, but stop acting like schismatics.

You can be a faithful Roman Catholic loyal to the pope and refuse to attend or celebrate the ordinary form of Mass. But you can’t be a faithful Roman Catholic loyal to the pope and disobey the pope, ignore the Holy See, and assume for yourself the authority of an ordinary jurisdiction that you haven’t got. That’s what you can’t do.

I have this suspicion you misunderstood what I said (incidently it’d be good if you’d use the quote button so it picks up the username of the person your quoting).

I wasn’t suggesting SSPX would have to accept performing OF in order to reconcile with Rome, and I doubt Rome would require it. What they need to accpet is that OF is indeed, the OF. Part of obedence is humbly, fully accepting the teaching authority of the Church.

While they would be well with in their rights to perform EF only (I’m sure the curent Pontiff would be very happy if they did), and well within their rights to promote the merits of EF, they should never show disrespect for the OF mass. If they can’t handle this, then are they truely being obedient? Or would they then, just be playing lipservice as you have already charged in this thread?

 

[crazzeto]

But at the same time, people still have favorites amongst priests and won’t attend where they dislike the priests. So it is up to the priests. If their favorite priest/sermonist were to have in Gloria in Latin on one Sunday per month in a Spanish-English hybrid, for example, would you have mass exodus to another parish?

Yes it’s up to Priests and Bishops, but please don’t tell me you actually believe this discharges folks like us from any responsiblities what so ever. No no no, it most certainly does not. It is their task, yes this is true. Equally it is our task as well. My Priests and Bishops are doing their part, I’m trying to do mine. My exhortation is that you at least try and find out what your Priests and Bishops are doing to promote TLM, if you don’t think they’re doing enough, then fine try getting a group of lay together to putforward your concerns.

After all, this is our job and we’re not discharged from it.

 

[Pregustator]

I

have this suspicion you misunderstood what I said (incidently it’d be good if you’d use the quote button so it picks up the username of the person your quoting).

I wasn’t suggesting SSPX would have to accept performing OF in order to reconcile with Rome, and I doubt Rome would require it. What they need to accpet is that OF is indeed, the OF. Part of obedence is humbly, fully accepting the teaching authority of the Church.

While they would be well with in their rights to perform EF only (I’m sure the curent Pontiff would be very happy if they did), and well within their rights to promote the merits of EF, they should never show disrespect for the OF mass. If they can’t handle this, then are they truely being obedient? Or would they then, just be playing lipservice as you have already charged in this thread?

I don’t know what the “quote button” is that automatically inserts the name of the poster that one is quoting. I did not realize there was such a feature. My apologies.

The SSPX are just playing lip service I believe. I think that many of them regard the whole structure of the contemporary Roman Catholic Church as invalid, as un-Catholic, as pretenders, as usurpers, as enemies. I honestly think that they believe that they and their affiliates are the Church, and that the actual Church is nothing but an empty, sinister, Masonic, demonic sham.

From my many years of observation of and participation with the SSPX, that is what I have come to believe. I don’t think there will ever be a meaningful reconciliation between the Vatican and the official structure of the SSPX. And I think that’s just fine. I don’t believe that an organization like that ought to be part of the Catholic Church.

 

[ProVobis]

After all, this is our job and we’re not discharged from it.

Agreed.

 

[ProVobis]

The SSPX are just playing lip service I believe. I think that many of them regard the whole structure of the contemporary Roman Catholic Church as invalid, as un-Catholic, as pretenders, as usurpers, as enemies. I honestly think that they believe that they and their affiliates are the Church, and that the actual Church is nothing but an empty, sinister, Masonic, demonic sham.

I don’t have anything to disprove what you’re saying. But to be fair, a whole lot of non-SSPX Catholics feel this way, if not to such extremes, and whole lot more have stopped going to church altogether.

 

[Pregustator]

I don’t have anything to disprove what you’re saying. But to be fair, a whole lot of non-SSPX Catholics feel this way, if not to such extremes, and whole lot more have stopped going to church altogether.

True, there are plenty of Catholics who aren’t affiliated with the SSPX who also look upon the Church in the same suspicious and disdainful light, but those Catholics are even farther out there than the SSPX, of course. We’re talking the Grunerites, the sedevacantists, and the folks who have up and elected their own popes. Not exactly good company.

 

[StTommyMore]

No, no, no, it is not, my quite mistaken friend. The Divine Office and the Mass make up the liturgy–the public prayer of the Church. Benediction forms no part whatsoever of the liturgy. Look it up. You’ll discover you are mistaken.

Whatever. You are turning this into an issue because your claim that Latin has completely disappeared is wholly without merit.

 

[Aramis]

First, you said it has disappeared “from the Liturgy.” Benediction is Liturgy. No parish is required to offer the EF as matter of course. If the laity does not make it known, then there is no reason to offer a mass that may well have no one in attendance. Since the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum, the celebration of the TLM has increased. It is not offered in my home parish, because my priest gauges his decision based on (name removed by moderator)ut from the congregation. Only a handful of the congregation has asked him about it, barely enough to have enough altar servers to do it right. So I stand by my analysis. The laity needs to speak up.

Liturgy is generally reserved for “Divine Worship Services” - the Mass (or it’s EC counterparts: Divine Liturgy, Quorbono/Qurbana, Badarak), or the liturgies of the presanctified gifts (Communion services), or a sunday reading service in place of a mass/DL due to absence of a priest.

The rest are referred to as paraliturgical functions, including Benediction when not attached directly to the mass.

 

[malphono]

Pregustator;7131136:

No, no, no, it is not, my quite mistaken friend. The Divine Office and the Mass make up the liturgy–the public prayer of the Church. Benediction forms no part whatsoever of the liturgy. Look it up. You’ll discover you are mistaken.

Whatever. You are turning this into an issue because your claim that Latin has completely disappeared is wholly without merit.

Actually, Pregustator is correct as to what constitutes the public prayer of the Church. I have to add here that I daresay he’s also correct that the use of Latin is, while not unknown in the OF, isn’t exactly common either. It’s is by far the exception in practice. The OF in its true “reform of the reform” mode is a very rare thing. Perhaps more so than the EF.