Would It Be A Sin To Attend Mass

[Seamus_L]

Yes, it would be better, but there are places in the world like Germany, Austria, France, the Netherlands where that might be totally impractical, and so it’s better (some of us here believe) to attend an SSPX chapel and hear what the Church has traditionally taught, rather than hearing who knows what at an official sanctioned one.

 

[Ignatius]

Yes, it would be better, but there are places in the world like Germany, Austria, France, the Netherlands where that might be totally impractical, and so it’s better (some of us here believe) to attend an SSPX chapel and hear what the Church has traditionally taught, rather than hearing who knows what at an official sanctioned one.

I would attend an Eastern Catholic Church Divine Liturgy, whose liturgy goes back to St. John Chrysostom. I would skip Mass altogether rather than attend one which is in open rebellion against the Holy See until such time, we pray that it may be soon, as they are once again happily back in the Barque of Peter.

 

[CHRIS_DICKSON]

I would attend an Eastern Catholic Church Divine Liturgy, whose liturgy goes back to St. John Chrysostom. I would skip Mass altogether rather than attend one which is in open rebellion against the Holy See until such time, we pray that it may be soon, as they are once again happily back in the Barque of Peter.

I must agree with Ignatius.

To my way of thinking, if someone attended a Mass presided over by someone who has been excommunicated, this would automatically extend the excommunication to the attendee as well.

 

[giuseppeTO]

I must agree with Ignatius.

To my way of thinking, if someone attended a Mass presided over by someone who has been excommunicated, this would automatically extend the excommunication to the attendee as well.

Chris,

An excommunication is not contagious. One must commit an act whose penalty is excommunication to incur the penalty.

The Vatican has declared that one may attend an SSPX Mass without incurring a penalty and fulfill one’s Sunday obligation.

GTO

 

[giuseppeTO]

I would attend an Eastern Catholic Church Divine Liturgy, whose liturgy goes back to St. John Chrysostom. I would skip Mass altogether rather than attend one which is in open rebellion against the Holy See until such time, we pray that it may be soon, as they are once again happily back in the Barque of Peter.

Skipping Mass is mortal sin. The Vatican has stated that it is equally acceptable to attend an Eastern Catholic Liturgy as it is to assist at an SSPX Mass. I suggest you stick to the Latin rite.

 

[Lib_Christian]

You are correct but I just would like to point out that anyone can baptize, even an atheist, as long as he does some pouring of water and uses the correct formula, in whatever language. And you don’t automatically become a Catholic but you do become a Christian by being validly baptized.

When were the rules changed saying you’re not a member of the RCC by Baptism?

 

[giuseppeTO]

You are correct but I just would like to point out that anyone can baptize, even an atheist, as long as he does some pouring of water and uses the correct formula, in whatever language. And you don’t automatically become a Catholic but you do become a Christian by being validly baptized.

Actually, Baptism does make you a Catholic since the sacrament itself is a Catholic sacrament and when valid in matter, form, and intent removes original sin.

The concept of baptism as an initiation into a certain sect, applicable or providing membership only into that sect, is a common modern error. The church teaches that all who are saved are so saved by the grace provided by the Catholic Church, the only entity with the ability to provide the valid sacraments as instituted by Christ, whether the soul is Catholic or not. The Church has infallibly taught that the minister of Baptism does not need to be an ordained clergy or even a Christian, as long as the conferor intends to do “what the (Catholic) Church does”.

One who does not practice the Catholic religion after a valid baptism is dependent on the mercy of God, the all-perfect judge, for his salvation and any speculation as to whether a particular non-Catholic merits salvation is simply speculation

 

[ProVobis]

When were the rules changed saying you’re not a member of the RCC by Baptism?

Rules were never changed. Lutherans baptize validly in their churches. They call it a sacrament but it’s obviously not what the RCC calls a sacrament.

If a Lutheran wanted to “convert” to RCC, he would not have to be rebaptized; however I have heard that certain baptisms are done conditionally if there were doubts as if the correct formula was used.

However, I’ll stand corrected if I’m wrong.

 

[giuseppeTO]

Rules were never changed. Lutherans baptize validly in their churches. They call it a sacrament but it’s obviously not what the RCC calls a sacrament.

If a Lutheran wanted to “convert” to RCC, he would not have to be rebaptized; however I have heard that certain baptisms are done conditionally if there were doubts as if the correct formula was used.

However, I’ll stand corrected if I’m wrong.

PV,

Check out post #27. I think this pretty much sums up the question of sacrament, validity, membership in the RCC, etc.

 

[Seamus_L]

I don’t know what some people fear in regards to attending an SSPX mass. I’m sure you wouldn’t hear anything that contradicts traditional Catholic teaching . The SSPX were providing the TLM when no one else was, so at the very least they should be commended for that.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I don’t know what some people fear in regards to attending an SSPX mass. I’m sure you wouldn’t hear anything that contradicts traditional Catholic teaching . The SSPX were providing the TLM when no one else was, so at the very least they should be commended for that.

**So what?

Western Rite Orthodox and extreme Anglo-Catholics likewise celebrated the Tridentine Mass. But are these celebrated in union with the Church.

Pope Benedict XVI has TWICE stated in 2009 that SSPX clergy exercise NO LEGITIMATE MINISTRY in the Catholic Church.

While there would be no danger to my faith were I to attend a mass celebrated by SSPX, my presence might confirm others, including the clergy involved, in what is at least a separatist position, giving the impression I approved it.**

 

[Seamus_L]

Attending an SSPX mass would confirm others and give the impression you approved of it ? As opposed to what ? Confirming and approving officially sanctioned churches where women have condemned the church’s teaching on contraception right in front of there priest, where a Eucharistic minister says there is nothing wrong with “loving” same sex relationships, where another Eucharistic minister boasts of having told his priest that he does not believe in confession to a priest. Those are just a few of the things I’ve witnessed in person in the last 3 years, but because no one takes action, some people assume these are spiritually healthier environments than SSPX chapels.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Attending an SSPX mass would confirm others and give the impression you approved of it ? As opposed to what ? Confirming and approving officially sanctioned churches where women have condemned the church’s teaching on contraception right in front of there priest, where a Eucharistic minister says there is nothing wrong with “loving” same sex relationships, where another Eucharistic minister boasts of having told his priest that he does not believe in confession to a priest. Those are just a few of the things I’ve witnessed in person in the last 3 years, but because no one takes action, some people assume these are spiritually healthier environments than SSPX chapels.

Apparently, you didn’t really read my reasons, did you?

I will repeat the operative sentence here:

While there would be no danger to my faith were I to attend a mass celebrated by SSPX, my presence might confirm others, including the clergy involved, in what is at least a separatist position, giving the impression I approved it.

Emphasis added.

My presence at an OF liturgy celebrated IN FULL COMMUNION WITH THE CHURCH does not mean I approve of deviations elsewhere, as you are wrongly implying.

Nor would my presence at an EF liturgy celebrated under the auspices of the local Latin Ordinary mean I appove of them, either.

You are making a totally false and illogical “if/then” argument.

Error on the left does NOT mean there can never be any error on the right. SSPX is NOT in regular communion with the Catholic Church. I am, and so is Fr. Brendan, who posts here.

 

[Seamus_L]

I’m talking about an SSPX chapel vs a Church in full communion, where church teaching is largely ignored. Fortunately I live in a diocese where I don’t have to make that choice, but there are places in the world (Western Europe in particular) where the SSPX is the only option for those in search of Traditional Catholicism.

 

[ProVobis]

Best to err on the side of custom than innovations.

Some Canon Laws of interest here:

Can. 26 Unless it has been specifically approved by the competent legislator, a custom which is contrary to the canon law currently in force, or is apart from the canon law, acquires the force of law only when it has been lawfully observed for a period of thirty continuous and complete years. Only a centennial or immemorial custom can prevail over a canonical law which carries a clause forbidding future customs.

Can. 27 Custom is the best interpreter of laws.

 

[LoyalViews]

No, it would not. Altough this is hypothetical (lets say he was real) the Priest, is a Heretic. It would be a sin upon himself, not upon you. But if you were to believe in this priest, then you would fall into the state of sin. Be careful! If you ever find a priest like this, do not believe what he has to say, because it is all wrong.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I would like to clarify this sentence:

\Nor would my presence at an EF liturgy celebrated under the auspices of the local Latin Ordinary mean I appove of them, either.\

**It should read:

Nor would my presence at an EF liturgy celebrated under the auspices of the local Latin Ordinary mean I appove of irregularites and deviations in certain few Ordinary Form masses, either.

Really, these are very much the exception, and NOT the rule in the OF, don’t you think?**

 

[Seamus_L]

The exception and NOT the rule ? I think not. Just yesterday morning I was listening to Father Corapi on Relevant Radio and he said in no uncertain terms, that there are Dioceses in the United States where you will not be ordained if you oppose the ordination of women. Other times Father Corapi has mentioned crystals where the Holy Water should be and Christa (crucified womanhood) placed in churches. Or read Michael Rose’s “Goodbye Good Men” to see how the radical feminist-pro homosexual agenda is being pushed in Catholic seminaries.
Bottomline is, we should always try to attend a fully approved church, but in some places that may not be possible and so better to attend an SSPX chapel than an officially sanctioned church where heresy is rampant.

 

[Malkin71]

The exception and NOT the rule ? I think not. Just yesterday morning I was listening to Father Corapi on Relevant Radio and he said in no uncertain terms, that there are Dioceses in the United States where you will not be ordained if you oppose the ordination of women. Other times Father Corapi has mentioned crystals where the Holy Water should be and Christa (crucified womanhood) placed in churches. Or read Michael Rose’s “Goodbye Good Men” to see how the radical feminist-pro homosexual agenda is being pushed in Catholic seminaries.

                   Bottomline is, we should always try to attend a fully approved church, but in some places that may not be possible and so better to attend an SSPX chapel than an officially sanctioned church where heresy is rampant.

You are 10000000000000000000000000000000000000% right!

How many time have we heard Priests, Bishops, Cardinals speak with contradictions to the teachings of the church. I myself questioned Bishop Wurel when he was Bishop of Pittsburgh about a Liturgical Abuse and he wlked away saying that it was ok. I had a Priest said that Hell does not exist. I have seen innovations done to the Mass and try to question it and you will be ignored!

I have read Michael Rose’s “Goodbye Good Men” and have lent it to a nun who is in her 80’s and she said that “It does not hit the nail on the head. It drives the nail right through the head!”

I like to watch Mass on EWTN, both forms EF and OF. I am gald that they celebrate both forms. I did like it when they showed a Divine Liturgy. They should do this more often. I also enjoy watching the Catholic movies and Bishop Sheen’s “Life is worth Living!” This is good.

What I do not like is since Mother Angelica was removed from the head of the Network, there have been changes. Alot of the programming is not the Orothodox programming of the past. Fr. Corapi is one. There are times I like him and time I disagree. I have respect and admire him for his repentance of his past. To turn your life around with the problems he had was a meriacle.

Raymond Ayroro in Mother Angelica’s biography touched on this and “EWTN, A Network Gone Wrong” by Chris Ferara talks about what had happened to EWTN. When I first read the book my eyes lit up! The more that I read, I realized that the book is correct. When Mother Angelica was on live she was Orothodoxy. She tould the truth about the State of the Church. The Liberals in the Church dispised her. Bishops and Cardnials too.

Here is a chapter from the book networkgonewrong.com/chapter.htm

I am fortunate and thankful that I am a member of the Pittsburgh Latin Mass Community. I now realize that the church is only a few miles away from where I live. My regular Parish is only a few blocks away. We have High and Low Mass every Sunday morning. and Hig Mass every Saturday. Also High Mass on Holy Days and During Holy Week. Some places have it only once a Month at odd times. When I go there my soul is nurished and I am fed.

My brother is in our Diocesis Deacon program. He told me that in th epast two years he had Priests that were on the Left and the Right about Church teachings. I am thankful that I have the background to dig my heels in and say no to modernism and I have a lifeline to the EF Mass.

 

[bpbasilphx]

\Other times Father Corapi has mentioned crystals where the Holy Water should be and Christa (crucified womanhood) placed in churches. Or read Michael Rose’s “Goodbye Good Men” to see how the radical feminist-pro homosexual agenda is being pushed in Catholic seminaries.

Bottomline is, we should always try to attend a fully approved church, but in some places that may not be possible and so better to attend an SSPX chapel than an officially sanctioned church where heresy is rampant.\

**Once more, you’re making the assumption that all parishes that celebrate the Ordinary Form are all having clown masses, crystals, etc, and the only two alterntatives are the “officially approved” Ordinary Form parishes and the separatist (my term) SSPX.

This is both a false assumption and non-existent dichotomy.

I don’t see what Michael Rose’s book has to do with this subject. Reviews in CONSERVATIVE publications, such as the National Catholic Register (and yes, i said Register, not Reporter) have found Rose to be less than accurate, to put it sweetly. As I recall NCReg said that they wished his book were true.

The only place I know where a female crucifix was placed was an EPISCOPAL Church. But have you ever heard of St. Maura, a Christian martyr who was crucified with her husband, St. Timothy?

Nevertheless, people will always see what the look for and hear what the listen for. And if they are looking for something at which to be offended, they will always find it.

Finally, an “officially approved Church” that might have heresy–and I’ve seen none where the OF is celebrated-- is still an approved church. This is better than a chapel where the clergy exercise “no legitimate ministry” in the Catholic Church, in the words of Pope Benedict.

In other words, the SSPX is NOT in full regular communion with the Catholic Church.

**