SSPX View of the New Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter rben20
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Its difficult to respond to this thread for a number of reasons. First, because of the innacuracy of placing the Society outside of the Church, and second, the insulting analogy of he palsied limb. For shame boys. Third, because the Society only teaches that which was passed onto her by Holy Mother Church–the same Faith from which sprang a heavenly army of Saints and nourished all of our ancestors for two thousand years, the same Liturgy which explicated uncategorically that Faith.

If the Society is a palsied limb now, so was the Church, extending the analogy above, prior to the 1960’s.

Mary, Seat of Wisom, pray for us.
 
rben20 said:
With readings like this, I wonder how they will ever become a part of the Church again…

sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/catholic_faqs__traditional.htm#attendnovusordo
Click to expand...
From your Link:
The changes in the words of the form in the Latin original, although certainly illicit and unprecedented in the history of the Church, do not alter the substance of its meaning, and consequently do not invalidate the Mass.
Click to expand...
Someone should tell the author that the original language was greek, and that Latin constituted a change in the words of institution after several centuries of worship in what we now call (mistakenly) the “Latin” rite. The move to Latin from Greek happened out of Africa in fact, not from with in Rome. Thus, whatever point the author was trying to make is negated by the fact that the “original latin” was in fact, already a translation of the original greek.

I think now more than ever we need to catechise the lay about this true history of the Mass. I see a wonderful revival of traditional Western piety happening, which is terrific. Unfortunetly however, going hand in hand with that is a temptation… To erroneously believe that our current worship is in anyway insufficient or at the very least substandard to the latin.

I love the latin personally, very much so. More over I think that at a minimun we should bring certain elements of the latin mass into the OF, like communion rails. But who am I to tell the holy mother church she’s wrong to pulmigate the mass we have? Not only do I think she’s not wrong, but more over since I only get one latin mass a month, and am exploring a (far in the future) possible vocation as a deacon, I’ve decided to sign up as a EMHC.
 
maurin said:
Its difficult to respond to this thread for a number of reasons. First, because of the innacuracy of placing the Society outside of the Church, and second, the insulting analogy of he palsied limb. For shame boys. Third, because the Society only teaches that which was passed onto her by Holy Mother Church–the same Faith from which sprang a heavenly army of Saints and nourished all of our ancestors for two thousand years, the same Liturgy which explicated uncategorically that Faith.

If the Society is a palsied limb now, so was the Church, extending the analogy above, prior to the 1960’s.

Mary, Seat of Wisom, pray for us.
Click to expand...
Well Maurin, I don’t mean to put the SSPX outside like the protestants or anything like that. Realize that they do not have faculties so they are in a way outside and not fully part of the Church. Apparently they are teaching a different Church then the one today…not my words but the Society’s.
 
Aramis said:
They’re still a part of the church… disobedient, like a palsied limb… but still attached.

And that’s old data; they’ve been saying the same thing for years now.
Click to expand...
More like an appendix. That is they are still a part of the church but have no function (ministry). The the appendix is still part of the body but has no function in the modern human.
 
Well, the SSPX are hanging on to the Church by a thread, at any rate. As someone who was once a part of the SSPX, I never saw a real desire for a full reunion with Rome, such as Rome is, today. Outside Rome’s authority, they can do whatever they want. If they say they are back in complete obedience to the reigning Pontiff, then they have to compromise…which they do not do. As it stands now, the SSPX publicly pray for the reigning Pope in the canon, just as they pay him lip service and accuse him of Modernism and heresy. It was the same with John Paul II and Paul VI, of course. Someone will have to one day explain to me what, exactly, is so traditionally Catholic about abusing the Pope and gleefully disobeying him. I would classify that as a disctinctly Protestant trait.

The SSPX look upon “Rome” as “Modernist Rome”, to quote Bishop Williamson (and countless other SSPX priests), and in their mind, no meaningful reunion will ever be possible until Rome renounces her wicked Modernist ways, repudiates Vatican II, completely, and fully restores the pre-Vatican II liturgy and ecclesiastical culture. The whole reason for the existence of the SSPX, after all, is to stand against Vatican II.

As long as the reforms and culture of Vatican II remain, the SSPX will continue to hang on to the Church by a thread. And they will continue to insist that the SSPX are being faithful to Roman Catholicism, not the Pope, not Rome, not the rest of the worldwide Catholic Church. Just themselves (and a handful of affilliated traditionalist groups).
 
rben20 said:
Well Maurin, I don’t mean to put the SSPX outside like the protestants or anything like that. Realize that they do not have faculties so they are in a way outside and not fully part of the Church. Apparently they are teaching a different Church then the one today…not my words but the Society’s.
Click to expand...
Realize it or no rben, it is not the Society preaching a new Gospel. I don’t have faculties, rben and neither do you. Are we outside the Church?

Please share with us the document, paragraph and line, from the current magisterium which equates the Society not having faculties with being outside of the Church. Until you are able to do so, stop going further in your rhetoric than does the Pope. Or at least ameliorate your choice of vocabulary.
 
maurin said:
Realize it or no rben, it is not the Society preaching a new Gospel. I don’t have faculties, rben and neither do you. Are we outside the Church?

Please share with us the document, paragraph and line, from the current magisterium which equates the Society not having faculties with being outside of the Church. Until you are able to do so, stop going further in your rhetoric than does the Pope. Or at least ameliorate your choice of vocabulary.
Click to expand...
From paragraph 4 of Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio Ecclesiae Unitatem.
However, the doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.

So unlike the SSPX, we the laity can legitimately exercise ministries in the Church, just to name a few, altar server, lector, Eucharistic Minister, teach RCIA or CCD, among others.
 
ByzCath said:
From paragraph 4 of Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio Ecclesiae Unitatem.
However, the doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.
So unlike the SSPX, we the laity can legitimately exercise ministries in the Church, just to name a few, altar server, lector, Eucharistic Minister, teach RCIA or CCD, among others.
Click to expand...
👍
 
crazzeto said:
. To erroneously believe that our current worship is in anyway insufficient or at the very least substandard to the latin.
Click to expand...
Is not the newer “more faithful to the Latin” translation an admission that the current translation is substandard to the Latin? Or any translation for that matter?
 
ByzCath said:
From paragraph 4 of Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio Ecclesiae Unitatem.
However, the doctrinal questions obviously remain and until they are clarified the Society has no canonical status in the Church and its ministers cannot legitimately exercise any ministry.

So unlike the SSPX, we the laity can legitimately exercise ministries in the Church, just to name a few, altar server, lector, Eucharistic Minister, teach RCIA or CCD, among others.
Click to expand...
A swing and a miss. You haven’t answered the question. Is there a sultan of swat, a king of the swing among you?

To restate the question: provide the document, paragraph and line which equates the Society"s priests and bishops lack of faculties with being outside of the Church.
 
justme said:
More like an appendix. That is they are still a part of the church but have no function (ministry). The the appendix is still part of the body but has no function in the modern human.
Click to expand...
rben20 said:
Well Maurin, I don’t mean to put the SSPX outside like the protestants or anything like that. Realize that they do not have faculties so they are in a way outside and not fully part of the Church. Apparently they are teaching a different Church then the one today…not my words but the Society’s.
Click to expand...
maurin said:
A swing and a miss. You haven’t answered the question. Is there a sultan of swat, a king of the swing among you?

To restate the question: provide the document, paragraph and line which equates the Society"s priests and bishops lack of faculties with being outside of the Church.
Click to expand...
You have also missed as he does not say that they are outside the Church, he said;
rben20 said:
Well Maurin, I don’t mean to put the SSPX outside like the protestants or anything like that. Realize that** they do not have faculties so they are in a way outside and not fully part of the Church**. Apparently they are teaching a different Church then the one today…not my words but the Society’s.
Click to expand...
See the portion I have bolded…

Of which I have given documentary evidence that you wished.

Nice try though.
 
ByzCath said:
So unlike the SSPX, we the laity can legitimately exercise ministries in the Church, just to name a few, altar server, lector, Eucharistic Minister, teach RCIA or CCD, among others.
Click to expand...
Could you show where the SSPX are rushing to be lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, etc?
 
maurin said:
Realize it or no rben, it is not the Society preaching a new Gospel. I don’t have faculties, rben and neither do you. Are we outside the Church?

Please share with us the document, paragraph and line, from the current magisterium which equates the Society not having faculties with being outside of the Church. Until you are able to do so, stop going further in your rhetoric than does the Pope. Or at least ameliorate your choice of vocabulary.
Click to expand...
Please Maurin, I am in no way going further then what the Pope has said as already quoted to you by ByzCath…document, paragraph and line. Priestly faculties are important whether you agree or not. No canonical status means no faculties.
 
No, please rben, do you read what you yourself write? You have equated not having faculties with being outside the Church. Show us, please, document, paragraph and line, where the Pope draws the same conclusion. And then try to make sense for us how assisting at a Mass offered by the Society fulfills our Sunday obligation.

This is all quite Brave New World. We’re not at war with Eurasia. We’ve never been at war with Eurasia. Oy is right, malphono.
rben20 said:
Please Maurin, I am in no way going further then what the Pope has said as already quoted to you by ByzCath…document, paragraph and line. Priestly faculties are important whether you agree or not. No canonical status means no faculties.
Click to expand...
 
It is difficult if not impossible to reconcile Rome’s current positions with those taught by all the pre-Vatican II popes. Things like ecumenism and religious liberty were condemned by all the pre-Vatican II popes but now are praised by Rome. How does one reconcile this? And how does the Vatican create a brand new rite of mass modeled after the protestants and then for 37 years try to outlaw the true Catholic mass? These are questions that simply must be asked. The SSPX has been told to give in and compromise with Rome, which really means compromising with the world. However, all the positive changes that have occurred since the end of the council (the indult, Ecclesia Dei, Summorum Pontificum) would not have occured if the SSPX and given in earlier.

This is just another crisis like many the Church has seen before and eventually she will get through this one as well. The Church will come back to tradition, it is only a matter of time, and the new mass will be yet another mistake relegated to the dust bin of history.

God bless,
Charlie

P.S. The whole discussion of whether the SSPX is in or out of the Church misses the point altogether. No one can point to any heresy or doctrinally unsound teaching of the SSPX so instead it is claimed that they are outside of the Church. But outside for what reason? For teaching the same things that the Church always taught before the council? Or for celebrating the mass of all time instead of a mass invented in the 1960’s? Just ask yourself what has the SSPX done so wrong?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top