With all due respect to Fr. Wathen, Dimond brothers, et. al., I'll take my Catholic doctrine from Pope St. Pius X and Pope Benedict XV

§ 2. Passive or merely material presence can be tolerated for the sake of honour or civil office, for grave reason approved by the Bishop in case of doubt, at the funerals, weddings, and similar solemnities of non-Catholics, provided danger of perversion and scandal is absent.

While I understand the perspective that the NO may be considered a sacrilege worse than any protestant service and also that one could argue that neither Pope envisaged the NO when promulgating the code, the plain fact is that they DID promulgate the code with the given wording. So that's what we have to work with.

The Popes didn't command Catholics to attend non-Catholic services.
They did not recommend attending them.
But they did tolerate it.

What that means in practice is that a reasonably sane, stable-in-their-Faith Catholic can choose to attend cousin Fred's NO funeral. He can also choose to not attend.
Those that have some kind of scruples over the matter should not attend.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but this situation is difficult enough, do we really need more self-appointed high-priests of the trad-sanhedrin convicting everyone of mortal sin over debatable points?

Negative on this. If we are going to reference CL at all in this, then it most certainly cannot be used to support attending the NO at all because CL says the opposite. And for our purpose, we can eliminate going for the sake of honor or civil office.

Note that the Law purposely excludes passive attendance for peace in the family, or even for social reasons. Contrary to your red text, CL does not leave it up to us to choose at all, there is no getting out of this.

 CL essentially states: "You cannot attend at all, but if you are to go, then these are the exceptions."

 Additionally, the Law states that approval from the Bishop is required when the reason to attend is a grave reason - because normally the reason to attend is not grave, the default position is you cannot go. That's the Law.  

Just stating facts. It matters for some

It should matter to every Catholic.   Feeneyism is a dangerous error against the Faith.  

Yes it should and no it isn't.

This ^^^

So let me understand the distinction here: the man in the back row of the Novus Ordo funeral praying his rosary is "passively" attending, whereas the man in the front row praying his rosary is "actively" attending?  It is O.K. morally to passively attend, but not O.K. to actively attend?  Who is to distinguish between active and passive attendance?

I am in agreement.  The people who claim canon law allows passive attendance at the novus ordo are just emotional.  They are wrongly interpreting an isolated permission of the past, and have expanded and corrupted it into a current social norm.  


What other areas of moral theology allow passive attendance for family support?  Holding someone's hand while they get an abortion?  Driving your daughter to the doctor's office to get birth control?  Going with your brother to a rock concert because he's sad his dog died?  Where does the sentimentality end?

Were catholics allowed to attend Arian weddings and funerals during the Arian crisis?  Were catholics allowed to attend Lutheran weddings and funerals during the Protestant revolt?  Were catholics allowed to attend weddings and funerals during the Anglican persecution in England?

The overall question is -- why would you want to support a false religion that is actively persecuting you, your Faith and God?  

Secondly, why is passive attendance even necessary to support a family member?  If they are actively attending and paying attention to the service, why would they care if you are in the back, just sitting there, or if you are in your car, waiting for the gathering afterwards?  In either situation, you can't talk to each other?  

What's the point of passive attendance?   Other than compromising your Catholic principles.  There are multiple ways you can support a loved one which don't require passive attendance.  

Canon Law doesn't say anything about not attending Mass at any Catholic Church of your choice.

You have to be careful when talking in absolutes on this topic. The Novus Ordo Missae is VIRTUALLY a new religion. But that word virtually is very important and can't be left out, without exaggerating. And exaggeration of a truth is a lie.

All the other heresies left home and apostatized. This one stayed home and transformed their home instead, keeping the name, buildings, and a huge % of the trappings and terminology. Furthermore, except for a few ACTUAL heretics who deny dogmas, most of the Novus Ordo milieu doesn't *directly* deny any Catholic dogmas. They give lip service to them, or they simply kill them by neglect, and/or by mixing in so much worldliness and modern ideas. So it's not the same thing at all.

When you're talking about the Crisis in the Church, you can't point to any doctrines, except to justify your choice of lifeboat (or course of action). It's a question of PRUDENCE, not DOGMA.

You can talk about what non-Catholic services Canon Law or the Faith permits us to attend under what circuмstances -- but the Crisis and anything touching on it is a whole different ball of wax. A whole different kettle of fish.

Novus Ordo Mass is not "Lutheran" simply speaking (simpliciter).

Yes, it is dangerous to the Faith, imprudent, even sinfully rash to attend if you fully understand the Crisis, Modernism, etc. and are willfully putting your Faith in danger.

But you can't just drop in "Novus Ordo Mass" in place of "Lutheran" in every prohibition against non-Catholic sects, heresies, etc. because it's different. None of those heresies is called "The Roman Catholic Church", nor can any of them show continuity going back to the Apostles. Therefore, there CAN be people of good will who just don't understand the Crisis -- nor the need to refrain 100% from the Novus Ordo.

And besides, most of the time these Novus Ordo funerals are occasions of sin anyway:  Bobby is sitting in the back hanging his head, saying his rosary, while sexy Cindy, who wears a miniskirt is sitting right in front of him, showing her arse to the whole church.  Bobby sits there and listens to the Fr. Jimmy talk about dead Aunt Suzy, how good she was (when in reality she has not been to church in ten years), meanwhile the church breaks out in song, "Blessed assurance, Jesus is mine...."  Not to mention the fact that Fr. Jimmy has an entire history of saying nothing about the corrupt bishop in the diocese who permits and conceals the crimes of the perverted priests in the diocese.  How is it that Bobby just sits there and does not have some pains of conscience within his soul?   

WRONG! So-called Feeneyism is identical to the Catholic Faith. Even orthodox schmatics of the Byzantine ritual Churches believe "Feeneyism", simply replacing "Catholic" Church and Faith with "Orthodox".

Feeneyism (doctrinal)= Catholicism

This does not mean that everything that Fr. Leonard Feeney or his community said or did is impeccable or infallible.

Except that the Council of Trent taught Baptism of desire.  Deny it all you want, it's your salvation you are playing with.

It so easy to just say, "I believe everything the Church teaches and deny nothing."  

Except that the Council of Trent taught Baptism of desire.  Deny it all you want, it's your salvation you are playing with.

It so easy to just say, "I believe everything the Church teaches and deny nothing." 

Trent taught no such thing.  I'm sick of the anonymous cowards on this thread.  At least show a bit of fortitude and de-cloak from anonymity.