"Traditional Catholic"?

[Sherlock]

thistle:

Anyone who thinks there were changes should read this:

QUOTE

Many people use Vatican II as an excuse stating that things have changed in the Catholic faith and that it is their prerogative to do as they wish. Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith states clearly in the book “The Cardinal Ratzinger Report,” that it is absolutely incorrect to refer to Pre-Vatican Council II and Post-Vatican Council II, as if there were changes in the Church’s position in matters of faith and morals. The only changes in that respect have sprung from erroneous interpretations of the Council. Pope John Paul II stated in his talk to the Bishops in Los Angeles in 1987:

“It is sometimes reported that a large number of Catholics today do not adhere to the teaching of the Catholic Church on a number of questions, notably sexual and conjugal morality, divorce and remarriage. Some are reported as not accepting the clear position on abortion. It has to be noted that there is a tendency on the part of some Catholics to be selective in their adherence to the Church’s moral teaching. It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the magisterium is totally compatible with being a “good Catholic,” and poses no obstacle to the reception of the Sacraments. This is a grave error that challenges the teaching of the Bishops in the United States and elsewhere.”

UNQUOTE

Great quote! I think all Catholics should read “The Ratzinger Report”, by the way.

 

[bear06]

verismo:

I think some of this comes from the fact that he built his own chappel where he has Mass celebrated in the 1962 Missal. But has an indult I believe.

He does not have an indult from the bishop of his diocese. Of course, he likes to point out that he has an indult from another bishop. Unfortunately, an indult form the local bishop is what is required.

 

[InnocentIII]

bear06:

He does not have an indult from the bishop of his diocese. Of course, he likes to point out that he has an indult from another bishop. Unfortunately, an indult form the local bishop is what is required.

It’s an interesting point as the chaple is a private chapel. Does anyone know the exact status of a private chapel in relation to indults?

 

[JOHNYJ]

A very mssused and deceptive phrase. MOst of the so called Traitionalist Catholics are’nt even any longer Catholic. They are Excommunicated.One must be in Union with Our Holy Father Benedict XVI to be Catholic of any kind and they are not !
Those Traditionalist Catholics inside the church are usualythose that support the Old Mass and attend those celebrated under the Indult.

 

[bear06]

InnocentIII:

It’s an interesting point as the chaple is a private chapel. Does anyone know the exact status of a private chapel in relation to indults?

Private chapel, Catholic Mass. No such thing as a private Mass. There can be Masses said for one group or another but they are still open to anyone. No Mass should ever be exclusive and because of this, the Bishop is responsible for it.

From Repemtionis Sacramentum:

The regulation of the Sacred Liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, which rests specifically with the Apostolic See and, according to the norms of law, with the Bishop.

And further:

[17.] “The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments attends to those matters that pertain to the Apostolic See as regards the regulation and promotion of the Sacred Liturgy, and especially the Sacraments, with due regard for the competence of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It fosters and enforces sacramental discipline, especially as regards their validity and their licit celebration”. Finally, it “carefully seeks to ensure that the liturgical regulations are observed with precision, and that abuses are prevented or eliminated whenever they are detected”[37]. In this regard, according to the tradition of the universal Church, pre-eminent solicitude is accorded the celebration of Holy Mass, and also to the worship that is given to the Holy Eucharist even outside Mass.

[18.] Christ’s faithful have the right that ecclesiastical authority should fully and efficaciously regulate the Sacred Liturgy lest it should ever seem to be “anyone’s private property, whether of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated”[38].

And…
.[43] Furthermore, “every lawful celebration of the Eucharist is directed by the Bishop, to whom is entrusted the office of presenting the worship of the Christian religion to the Divine Majesty and ordering it according to the precepts of the Lord and the laws of the Church, further specified by his own particular judgement for the Diocese”.[44]

Probably more but I’m sure I’m coming close to exceeding the word limit.

 

[bear06]

There was more!

”.[54] All, including members of Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life as well as those of all ecclesial associations and movements of any kind, are subject to the authority of the diocesan Bishop in all liturgical matters,[55] apart from rights that have been legitimately conceded. To the diocesan Bishop therefore falls the right and duty of overseeing and attending to Churches and oratories in his territory in regard to liturgical matters, and this is true also of those which are founded by members of the above-mentioned institutes or under their direction, provided that the faithful are accustomed to frequent them.[56]

 

[InnocentIII]

[54]
All, including members of Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life as well as those of all ecclesial associations and movements of any kind, are subject to the authority of the diocesan Bishop in all liturgical matters,[55] apart from rights that have been legitimately conceded. To the diocesan Bishop therefore falls the right and duty of overseeing and attending to Churches and oratories in his territory in regard to liturgical matters, and this is true also of those which are founded by members of the above-mentioned institutes or under their direction, provided that the faithful are accustomed to frequent them.[56]

I have highlighted the interesting part. If he is celebrating a licit mass for which an indult has been given and the faithful are not accustomed to frequenting his private chapel then it would appear that what he is doing is ok. Provided that a priest agrees to say mass and it is only for the members of his household. For example, most orders of nuns used to have chapels that were restricted to the use of the order only. Presumably they could have an indult to have the mass in latin regardless of the bishop within that chapel.

 

[bear06]

InnocentIII:

I have highlighted the interesting part. If he is celebrating a licit mass for which an indult has been given and the faithful are not accustomed to frequenting his private chapel then it would appear that what he is doing is ok. Provided that a priest agrees to say mass and it is only for the members of his household. For example, most orders of nuns used to have chapels that were restricted to the use of the order only. Presumably they could have an indult to have the mass in latin regardless of the bishop within that chapel.

I don’t think so. Maybe looking at the footnote following the provided part might help. The footnote was Canon 638 1

Can. 683 §1 Either personally or through a delegate, the diocesan Bishop can visit churches or oratories to which Christ’s faithful have habitual access, schools other than those open only to the institute’s own members, and other works of religion and charity entrusted to religious, whether these works be spiritual or temporal. He can do this at the time of pastoral visitation, or in a case of necessity.

What does this mean? Everything is under the bishop except schools that are provided for the institute’s own members, not the laity.

 

[bear06]

I should have pointed out that those that attend Mel’s church do have habitual access. They have access to it every Sunday.