Twitterpated with an SSPX girl...

[AngelicDoctor]

We lead by example:…and a little humor…
If that ain’t a '62 Missal, what is it?
http://www.jimmyakin.org/images/john_paul_ii_quran.jpg

I am sure that he is merely kissing a huge (over-sized Reader’s Edition) copy of the Liturgy of the Hours, one of the Ordinary Time volumes (you’ve seen it, the green one). I am sure that the guy standing next to him is just one of our brothers from one of those exotic Eastern Rites.

 

[Godefridus]

That’s all sad but in regard to confirmation in the Latin Church, see canon 880.

Canon 880 “§1. The sacrament of confirmation is conferred through anointing with chrism on the forehead, which is done by the imposition of the hand, and through the words prescribed in the approved liturgical books.”

This wording of canon 880 comes from Paul VI, apostolic constitution, Divinae consortium naturae, 15 August 1971. A careful examination of the apostolic constitution leads canonical experts to conclude that the essential matter is the “anointing with chrism on the forehead, which is done by the laying on of hands.” (Huels, Woestmann, New CLSA commentary). Although it can be confusing, it is the use of the hand to chrismate (with the prescribed words, “be sealed with the gift of the Holy Spirit”) that is presented.

The earlier laying on with hands and prescribed prayer which precedes this is not of the essence of the conferral of the sacrament, and required for licit rather than valid administration.

However, canon 884§2 permits the bishop to invite other priests to join with him in administering the sacrament. If the bishop were the celebrant, it could only be concluded that he made this invitation.

Ecclesia supplet would not relevant to this situation. (And not to open another topic, although it is the stock of the SSPX, it generally is not relevant to the confessions and weddings of the SSPX since the conditions do not exist for it to kick in and supply the faculties needed for validity.)

Right. As I said, I don’t doubt she is validly Confirmed. But her traumatic memory of the incident and whatever the SSPX is telling her combine to give her a hankering for a conditional Confirmation.

 

[Triumpha]

But she is strongly SSPX and I am quite strongly with the Magisterium.

I am strongly SSPX and strongly with the Magisterium!



Most SSPXers are!

Triumpha.

 

[Triumpha]

Your best bet would be to try and find a reverent Novus Ordo (most cathedrals and older parishes have reverent NO’s) which fits her schedule, and yours.

A strong-SSPXer is unlikely to want to attend a reverent NO. I wouldn’t, anyway.

Triumpha.

 

[Triumpha]

FYI, the matter for the sacrament is not oil, but rather the laying on of hands.

If the Bishop was the one who laid hands upon her, there should be no question at all.

newadvent.org/cathen/04215b.htm

**Matter and Form **

There has been much discussion among theologians as to what constitutes the essential matter of this sacrament. Some, e.g. Aureolus and Petavius, held that it consists in the imposition of hands. Others, with St. Thomas, Bellarmine, and Maldonatus, maintain that it is the anointing with chrism. According to a third opinion (Morinus, Tapper) either anointing or imposition of hands suffices. Finally,** the most generally accepted view is that the anointing and the imposition of hands conjointly are the matter.** The “imposition”, however, is not that with which the rite begins but the laying on of hands which takes place in the act of anointing. As Peter the Lombard declares: Pontifex per impositionem manus confirmandos ungit in fronte (IV Sent., dist. xxxiii, n. 1; cf. De Augustinis, “De re sacramentaria”, 2d ed., Rome, 1889, I). The chrism employed must be a mixture of olive oil and balsam consecrated by a bishop. (For the manner of this consecration and for other details, historical and liturgical, see CHRISM.) The difference regarding the form of the sacrament, i.e. the words essential for confirmation, has been indicated above in the description of the rite. The validity of both the Latin and the Greek form is unquestionable. Additional details are given below in the historical outline.

secondexodus.com/html/catholicdefinitions/matter.htm

The matter of confirmation is chrism

.

newadvent.org/summa/4072.htm#2

Article 2. Whether chrism is a fitting matter for this sacrament?
I answer that, Chrism is the fitting matter of this sacrament. For, as stated above (1), in this sacrament the fulness of the Holy Ghost is given for the spiritual strength which belongs to the perfect age. Now when man comes to perfect age he begins at once to have intercourse with others; whereas until then he lives an individual life, as it were, confined to himself. Now the grace of the Holy Ghost is signified by oil; hence Christ is said to be “anointed with the oil of gladness” (Psalm 44:8), by reason of His being gifted with the fulness of the Holy Ghost. Consequently oil is a suitable matter of this sacrament. And balm is mixed with the oil, by reason of its fragrant odor, which spreads about: hence the Apostle says (2 Corinthians 2:15): “We are the good odor of Christ,” etc. And though many other things be fragrant, yet preference is given to balm, because it has a special odor of its own, and because it confers incorruptibility: hence it is written (Sirach 24:21): “My odor is as the purest balm.”

 

[Godefridus]

I am strongly SSPX and strongly with the Magisterium!



Most SSPXers are!

Triumpha.

Oh, I’m sorry. My mistake. I’m not with the Magisterium then. I’m just with those liberal masonic heretics in Rome who think they are the Magisterium.

What was I thinking? The Holy Spirit’s protection departed from any living, visible institution years ago.

 

[pnewton]

A strong-SSPXer is unlikely to want to attend a reverent NO.

Which is precisely why this issue needs to be resolved. Christ in the Eucharist is the center of the Catholic faith. It is incompatible to be closely involved with anyone who will not respect that. I know that women tend to go more on their feelings, but when it comes to this critical issue, a Catholic should respond with Faith in the real presence. If one feels there is not enough reverence, then she would be the one to bring that reverence to Christ as He is present on the altar.

Also, as the spiritual head of the household, you would be responsible for spiritual growth. If she refuses to consider the need to be with Christ because her Mass is better than yours, and her Jesus is better than yours, I believe the battle will already be lost.

The type of Mass must be secondary to Christ who is present there.

 

[Triumpha]

Which is precisely why this issue needs to be resolved. Christ in the Eucharist is the center of the Catholic faith. It is incompatible to be closely involved with anyone who will not respect that. I know that women tend to go more on their feelings, but when it comes to this critical issue, a Catholic should respond with Faith in the real presence. If one feels there is not enough reverence, then she would be the one to bring that reverence to Christ as He is present on the altar.

Also, as the spiritual head of the household, you would be responsible for spiritual growth. If she refuses to consider the need to be with Christ because her Mass is better than yours, and her Jesus is better than yours, I believe the battle will already be lost.

The type of Mass must be secondary to Christ who is present there.

Wrong. The Vatican discourages attendance at SSPX Masses, doesn’t it? Even though those Masses have the Real Presence. Same goes for the Orthodox.

Although the Real Presence is obviously a sine qua non, it is not the only matter to consider regarding attendance at a liturgy.

If it were, the Vatican would not discourage attendance at SSPX Masses! Catholics would be saying of SSPX Masses “they have the Real Presence! How can anyone stay away?!”

Well, the reason people give for staying away from the SSPX is its irregular situation. They don’t let the Real Presence draw them towards SSPX Masses!

And the reason many SSPXers stay away from the NO is the RITE itself. And we similarly won’t allow others to use the Blessed Sacrament to “morally blackmail” us.

See. It’s more than the Real Presence that decides whether any Catholic goes to any particular Mass.

Triumpha.

 

[Titus]

Wrong. The Vatican discourages attendance at SSPX Masses, doesn’t it? Even though those Masses have the Real Presence. Same goes for the Orthodox.

Although the Real Presence is obviously a sine qua non, it is not the only matter to consider regarding attendance at a liturgy.

If it were, the Vatican would not discourage attendance at SSPX Masses! Catholics would be saying of SSPX Masses “they have the Real Presence! How can anyone stay away?!”

Well, the reason people give for staying away from the SSPX is its irregular situation. They don’t let the Real Presence draw them towards SSPX Masses!

And the reason many SSPXers stay away from the NO is the RITE itself. And we similarly won’t allow others to use the Blessed Sacrament to “morally blackmail” us.

See. It’s more than the Real Presence that decides whether any Catholic goes to any particular Mass.

Triumpha.

If you don’t have a choice, there is no problem with an SSPX mass, because, as you said, they have the Eucharist too. But most of us have a NO near us, and it is far better to attend mass said by a priest in obedience to Rome than not. So the Eucharist must be #1, but not the only consideration.

 

[pnewton]

Wrong. The Vatican discourages attendance at SSPX Masses, doesn’t it?

Boy you jump in with both feet. I did not even mention the SSPX in that post, nor did I refer to it. I only mentioned the type of Mass, not the licitness of the Mass. There are licit TLM Masses, you know.

 

[Titus]

Boy you jump in with both feet. I did not even mention the SSPX in that post, nor did I refer to it. I only mentioned the type of Mass, not the licitness of the Mass. There are licit TLM Masses, you know.

Absolutely- any FSSP or ICRSS mass is totally licit.

 

[Subrosa]

I took a girl to coffee recently, and I am just head-over-heels for her. Beautiful in heart, mind, and body; and her first kiss will be with her new husband (if she gets married). But she is strongly SSPX and I am quite strongly with the Magisterium. It breaks my heart because I can’t attend an SSPX Mass without internally obsessing with its implicit disobedience, and she’s more or less avowed never to attend a VatII Mass ever again (granted, she has had a more painful exposure to horrific Mass abuses than I ever had).

Probably nothing will come of this, and that makes me sad. But it gives me one powerful reason to pray for the reunion of SSPX with Rome.

How about a compromise? See if she’ll go with you to an authorized Latin Mass. That way she gets the Latin Mass that she likes and you get to stay with the Pope.

Subrosa

 

[ghost8108]

Better dead than Novis Ordo, are there no good looking gals in your modern Catholic Church? or are they as plain and vacant, as Vatican Two itself?:yup:

 

[stmaria]

Better dead than Novis Ordo, are there no good looking gals in your modern Catholic Church? or are they as plain and vacant, as Vatican Two itself?:yup:

Come on ghost8108. That is unnecessary. Completely out of line. Most of us truly want to discuss our different opinions. Your attitude is divisive. We are all Catholics.

 

[AJV]

And besides, what is the point of reviving a year old thread?

 

[bear06]

And besides, what is the point of reviving a year old thread?

Amen. Let sleeping threads lie. I suppose Ghost is just here to balance out the new fellows of the opposite end of the spectrum. Must just be spring in the air.

 

[Duke_of_Mantua]

I took a girl to coffee recently, and I am just head-over-heels for her. Beautiful in heart, mind, and body; and her first kiss will be with her new husband (if she gets married). But she is strongly SSPX and I am quite strongly with the Magisterium. It breaks my heart because I can’t attend an SSPX Mass without internally obsessing with its implicit disobedience, and she’s more or less avowed never to attend a VatII Mass ever again (granted, she has had a more painful exposure to horrific Mass abuses than I ever had).

Probably nothing will come of this, and that makes me sad. But it gives me one powerful reason to pray for the reunion of SSPX with Rome.

Where did you meet her? All the girls I used to date were baptized Catholic and it ends there. I am positive someone like her is refreshing even though she’s a rebel.

 

[dyspepsic]

I took a girl to coffee recently, and I am just head-over-heels for her. Beautiful in heart, mind, and body; and her first kiss will be with her new husband (if she gets married). But she is strongly SSPX and I am quite strongly with the Magisterium. It breaks my heart because I can’t attend an SSPX Mass without internally obsessing with its implicit disobedience, and she’s more or less avowed never to attend a VatII Mass ever again (granted, she has had a more painful exposure to horrific Mass abuses than I ever had).

Probably nothing will come of this, and that makes me sad. But it gives me one powerful reason to pray for the reunion of SSPX with Rome.

I must say you extremists sure are creative in coming up with these new SSPX threads.

 

[bear06]

I must say you extremists sure are creative in coming up with these new SSPX threads.

It’s not a new thread. It’s rather old. Again, valid questions deserve answers, not criticism.

What is up with all of these new young mavericks?

 

[Quarles47]

Ok, the Martyr complex in me is going to show; so get ready with the stones… The SSPX and those that follow that movement are in schism and basically not catholic. I have no sympathy for anyone that’s against the Holy Father.
:tsktsk: