The SSPX and Divine Mercy Sunday

[Ockham]

Also, there are millions upon millions of Catholics today who attend the OF and celebrate the sacraments who consider themselves “Traditional Catholics.” If you are bothered by them posting in this forum then I suggest you petition CAF to create a separate forum for those who do not wish to see the post-1962 Church. I have already made the suggestion and was denied but if enough ask, who knows?

The term “Traditional Catholic” is used to describe someone who attends the EF, you know, the Mass that’s older than forty years. Maybe CAF should open a “Progressive” forum and then Traditionals can harass them.

 

[franklinf]

Oh, good grief. Can you ever let go of the “us vs. them” attitude? I asked a legitimate question and the “Traditionalists” defense shields go up. By the third post I’m already getting that “the question is slanted.”

I’ve been told by moderators that if I don’t like something in a thread, then don’t read it. I have every right to post in the “Traditional Catholic Forum” as anyone else, so if it bothers you, then don’t read it. I have read every slander imaginable against the OF without a pang of conscience from many here, so I’m not particularly worried if something I said gives you a ruffled feather or two. If that sounds rude, then I’m sorry but I’m so sick and tired of seeing everything going one way here.

Also, there are millions upon millions of Catholics today who attend the OF and celebrate the sacraments who consider themselves “Traditional Catholics.” If you are bothered by them posting in this forum then I suggest you petition CAF to create a separate forum for those who do not wish to see the post-1962 Church. I have already made the suggestion and was denied but if enough ask, who knows?

I wonder why people thought it was a biased question…
“Knowing the attitude and opinion that the SSPX has for Pope John Paul II”
"In case some have not noticed, the Church did not end in 1962. "

Agreed, you do have a right to post in the TC forum. No need to make baiting threads however. Especially to such an obvious question. Not part of the 1962 calendar so the SSPX, FSSP, etc don’t celebrate it at Mass (but then again, neither do all NO Masses). SSPX doesn’t ignore what happened after 1962 - they follow canon law. For example, they make it clear that one only needs to fast an hour before Communion.

As for the last bit - I completely agree. Its a real shame that many people don’t have regular access to the TLM. No one should have to drive 2 hours one way just for the TLM.

 

[franklinf]

If you folks don`t mind another question being slid in:

Does the SSPX recognise the legitimacy of the Luminous Mysteries of The Holy Rosary?
Poor Fr. Gruner doesn`t.

Poor Fr. Gruner?

 

[Ockham]

The 150 decades of the rosary match the 150 psalms. There is no need to add another mystery to the rosary. Pope John Paul II wrote many good books so there was no need to create some other legacy if that was his motivation behind the “Luminous” mysteries.

 

[SunnaB16]

Poor Fr. Gruner?

Well: hes a bit off isnt he!

Poor bloke: he`s been saving the world virtually singlehanded for years; the plotters in the Vatican have been persecuting him all of that time, especially that nasty Cardinal Ratzinger who set up a cabal with 3 or 4 other prelates to wreck the Church. Thus saith The Fatima Crusader.
Imagine the horror after the last Papal election!

The greenies must be after him…all of the trees cut down to generate his begging letters.

"They" just won`t stop picking on Fr. Gruner!!!

PS
Thanks for mentioning the 1 hour fast.
That was another SSPX practice (discipline?) i`d been wondering about.

 

[ciero]

I wonder why people thought it was a biased question…
“Knowing the attitude and opinion that the SSPX has for Pope John Paul II”
"In case some have not noticed, the Church did not end in 1962. "

Agreed, you do have a right to post in the TC forum. No need to make baiting threads however. Especially to such an obvious question. Not part of the 1962 calendar so the SSPX, FSSP, etc don’t celebrate it at Mass (but then again, neither do all NO Masses). SSPX doesn’t ignore what happened after 1962 - they follow canon law. For example, they make it clear that one only needs to fast an hour before Communion.

As for the last bit - I completely agree. Its a real shame that many people don’t have regular access to the TLM. No one should have to drive 2 hours one way just for the TLM.

Typical RC trads, we must have all the smells and bells but none of the asetical
discipline that goes along with it. I can have no respect for Trad RCers who do away with the traditional fasting of the Western church, but screem bloody murder if a word of the Mass is changed. You trads need to take a leaf out of the Traditional Orthodox (old calender folks) book. They will show you how to be Traditional!

Either your Traditional about everything or you become a cafeteria catholic just like the progressives.

 

[franklinf]

Typical RC trads, we must have all the smells and bells but none of the asetical
discipline that goes along with it. I can have no respect for Trad RCers who do away with the traditional fasting of the Western church, but screem bloody murder if a word of the Mass is changed. You trads need to take a leaf out of the Traditional Orthodox (old calender folks) book. They will show you how to be Traditional!

Either your Traditional about everything or you become a cafeteria catholic just like the progressives.

I can’t tell if you’re being serious or not…

The SSPX **strongly recommends **the traditional fast but also recognizes that they can’t compel the faithful to do so under the pain of mortal sin, due to the new Canon Law

EDIT: Speaking from experience at my local SSPX Chapel

 

[ciero]

I can’t tell if you’re being serious or not…

The SSPX **strongly recommends **the traditional fast but also recognizes that they can’t compel the faithful to do so under the pain of mortal sin, due to the new Canon Law

EDIT: Speaking from experience at my local SSPX Chapel

VERY serious.

How can the SSPX quote cannon law that is no longer in force? Maybe they should quote cannon law from 1914 and enforce the black fast.
So the trads are being pick and choose catholics, picking to enforce lax fasting regulations. I dont get it.

 

[franklinf]

VERY serious.

How can the SSPX quote cannon law that is no longer in force? Maybe they should quote cannon law from 1914 and enforce the black fast.
So the trads are being pick and choose catholics, picking to enforce lax fasting regulations. I dont get it.

I’m not sure I’m following.

The Church changed the discipline of the Eucharistic fast to 1 hour from the previous three hours. No disputing that is well within her right.

The SSPX, a priestly society which is most certainly not setting up a parallel church, recognizes that is a licit change. The SSPX thus doesn’t tell its parishioners they are in a state of mortal sin for not fasting longer, as they have no authority to do so.

That being said, they disagree iwth the change and strongly recommend that its parishioners observe the more traditional discipline of fasting longer.

And you have a problem with this? Is there something I’m missing? How are they being cafeteria catholics? They aren’t the pope.

 

[Indyann]

Oh, good grief. Can you ever let go of the “us vs. them” attitude? I asked a legitimate question and the “Traditionalists” defense shields go up. By the third post I’m already getting that “the question is slanted.”

I’ve been told by moderators that if I don’t like something in a thread, then don’t read it. I have every right to post in the “Traditional Catholic Forum” as anyone else, so if it bothers you, then don’t read it. I have read every slander imaginable against the OF without a pang of conscience from many here, so I’m not particularly worried if something I said gives you a ruffled feather or two. If that sounds rude, then I’m sorry but I’m so sick and tired of seeing everything going one way here.

Also, there are millions upon millions of Catholics today who attend the OF and celebrate the sacraments who consider themselves “Traditional Catholics.” If you are bothered by them posting in this forum then I suggest you petition CAF to create a separate forum for those who do not wish to see the post-1962 Church. I have already made the suggestion and was denied but if enough ask, who knows?

I am just one of those millions. I consider myself traditional, but I do not attend the EF.

This “Traditional Catholic” forum was formed about 3 years ago, thereabouts. There were many, many protests because many thought it would only cause more divisiveness in the Body of Christ.

How prophetic!

 

[RoryMcKenzie56]

I have a complete Daily Novus Ordo Missal from Our Sunday Visitor published in 1994. There is not one word about Sister Faustina, the Chaplet of Divine Mercy, or its being Divine Mercy Sunday. There is no special preface and nothing in any other prayers or antiphons except briefly in the Opening Prayer. It is called Sunday of the Second Week of Easter. In the Opening Prayer the priest calls to “God of mercy”. Is that it? There is this long responsiorial psalm where it would be perfect to do Ps 135 with the repetitious “for his mercy endureth forever”. But they didn’t choose that. Has there been a revision of the prayers or readings since 1994 to incorporate “Mercy Sunday” into the liturgy?

It doesn’t look to me like the New Mass recognizes Divine Mercy Sunday in the liturgy in any significant way either.

 

[franklinf]

**I am just one of those millions. I consider myself traditional, but I do not attend the EF.
**
This “Traditional Catholic” forum was formed about 3 years ago, thereabouts. There were many, many protests because many thought it would only cause more divisiveness in the Body of Christ.

How prophetic!

Where are you located? The following is a pretty good site for TLMs in the US.
ecclesiadei.org/masses.cfm

 

[ciero]

I’m not sure I’m following.

The Church changed the discipline of the Eucharistic fast to 1 hour from the previous three hours. No disputing that is well within her right.

The SSPX, a priestly society which is most certainly not setting up a parallel church, recognizes that is a licit change. The SSPX thus doesn’t tell its parishioners they are in a state of mortal sin for not fasting longer, as they have no authority to do so.

That being said, they disagree iwth the change and strongly recommend that its parishioners observe the more traditional discipline of fasting longer.

And you have a problem with this? Is there something I’m missing? How are they being cafeteria catholics? They aren’t the pope.

The SSPA does not recognize the Vatican’s right to change the mass, but they do recognize the Vatican’s right to change the Eucharistic fast. Go figure. That is where they are being cafeteria catholics. If the SSPX expects any credibility they must be consistent. You cant have your cake and eat it too.(1 hour before communion!)

 

[franklinf]

The SSPA does not recognize the Vatican’s right to change the mass, but they do recognize the Vatican’s right to change the Eucharistic fast. Go figure. That is where they are being cafeteria catholics. If the SSPX expects any credibility they must be consistent. You cant have your cake and eat it too.(1 hour before communion!)

The SSPX does recognize the Vatican’s right to change the Mass…

 

[ciero]

The SSPX does recognize the Vatican’s right to change the Mass…

Yeah thats why they broke communion with Rome. Realy recognizing Romes rights. I cant believe you cant recognize the inconsistency.

 

[Timothysis]

Timothysis,

As to your objection, no one has the authority to revise the calendar of the 1962 Missal without the Pope. Of course this hasn’t been done before because of the long held proposition by those who despise the Old Mass that the Old Mass had been abrogated. Don’t blame the Traditionalists for what the popes have failed to do from 1962 until the Motu Proprio just a few years ago, admitting finally that the Old Mass has always been licit in the Latin Rite and will continue to be so.

Traditional Priests can’t just change the calendar and willy nilly make up their own. They have to go with the calendar of the Mass they are saying. Presumably, some of the later feast days will be incorporated at a proper time with the approval of the proper authorities.

Our SSPX chapel had announcements at both Masses reminding the faithful it was Divine Mercy Sunday.

Fair enough. But the Divine Mercy Mass is simply a Mass said after the recitation of the Chaplet at 3:00 Sunday afternoon. It is part of the indulgence granted by the Church in honor of Divine Mercy Sunday. So, the regular calender Mass can still be celebrated on Sunday mornings; the Divine Mercy Mass is simply a Mass at the Hour of Mercy, 3:00.

Its kinda hard to put into words; what I’m asking is, do those groups that celebrate according to the old Missal celebrate a Mass at 3:00 on Divine Mercy Sunday? Since it is such a generous indulgence by the Church I would think that it should be widely available, though like some others have said, even many regular parish Churches do not celebrate a Divine Mercy Mass (I guess some priests are too busy to be bothered with it). Is it necessary to have to an explicit feast according to the old calender in order to celebrate a Mass?

 

[Timothysis]

I’m curious Tim, just how does the SSPX feel about Pope John Paul II?

One need only read the many questions and answers and articles on their website to answer your question. This quote should be enough:
*
“It is not for us to judge his culpability in the destruction of the Church, more devastating now than in any previous pontificate (with the probable exception of pope Paul VI’s). Only God can so judge him.”*

They convict him for “his culpability in the destruction of the Church,” then state that “only God can so judge him.” Nice.

 

[Timothysis]

The term “Traditional Catholic” is used to describe someone who attends the EF, you know, the Mass that’s older than forty years.

Says who, YOU??? This is exactly what I’m talking about!!! Show me a credible source that one can only be a “Traditional” Catholic if you attend the EF. Just one.

Maybe CAF should open a “Progressive” forum and then Traditionals can harass them.

Yes, so, according to you, if one doesn’t attend the EF, then one is automatically a “Progressive.” I have never seen more meaningless labels tossed around in all of my life.

 

[Timothysis]

I am just one of those millions. I consider myself traditional, but I do not attend the EF.

You are the proof of my point. It takes more to be Catholic than what form of the liturgy one prefers.

Good for you!

 

[Ockham]

What’s wrong with having clear defining terms to separate attendees of the two forms?