CathInfo.com

Okay this thread is getting a little too heated... lets everyone cool down! Here, some pious pick up lines from a previous thread. If you can guess who wrote this, you've been here too long lol:

Quote

Some time ago, someone came to me with the question of how to ask his betrothed for a modest kiss in such a manner as to impress her, to which I responded,

Quote:
Say to her, "Your lips are as sweet rubrics to which I am bound sub gravi to adhere!"

Ahhh.. all better.


Vladimir, our brother, please pray on this issue. You are no neo-Trad, I think you're good willed, and thats why you've come here and asked the question you did. But sometimes, we ask people the things we want them to tell us. And when our friends tell us those things which are burdensome, we flaw them and what is said, instead of neutrally taking into account what is presented to us. This is a very sound forum, with some very honest, and good-willed people. I will say a prayer for you.

Hobble?

Another forum member wrote:

While many people have good intentions, their "experience" in moral theology often consists of nothing more than a good search engine, or a Catholic book or two.

This is quite true, and I must candidly admit that I fit this description to a great extent. This is good to remember because it is a humbling reminder of our limited capacities as layfolk. But I shall go further beyond what this poster wrote and state that the chief reason why a learned and holy Priest of good repute is to be sought for counsel in preference to any layman, personal sanctity and erudition notwithstanding, is because the former is endowed with the graces of state that have his Sacred Orders as their origin and whereby he may direct efficaciously and effectively the individual Catholic who has recourse to his judgment with the appropriate dispositions (humility, sincerity, docility, etc.); the salvation of souls being the chief end of the sacred Priesthood together with the glory of God, and this ultimately constitutes the only reason why epikea would be invoked in the seeking and attaining to Holy Orders on the part of traditionalist clerics without the consent of the Roman Pontiff.

My views on the matter in question were sought, and by charity I am obliged to assent to the request. The following are merely my personal perspectives and opinions, which do not of themselves oblige consciences in any way, since I have no competence or authority to do so, as stated above.

Having carefully pondered upon the matter, and having consulted various texts, I believe the disputation upon the initial inquiry that began this thread may be reduced to the following questions: the first being, "May Catholics co-operate in non-Catholic functions?" and the second, subordinate to and elucidating upon the first question, being, "What exactly constitutes co-operation?"

The principles pertaining to the second question are explained by Rev. Fr. Davis in his Moral and Pastoral Theology (vol. I., treatise V., ch. viii., secs. 1 and 2 pp. 341-343; London and New York: Sheed and Ward, 1958). Instead of summarizing these principles, I have scanned and attached these pages.

Rev. Fr. Davis also explains the principles pertaining to the first and chief question, regarding co-operation in non-Catholic functions (op. cit., vol. I., treatise V., ch. ix., p. 282-290). These pages are also attached.

Directly pertaining to the predicament in question, Rev. Father Davis wrote:

It is wrong to play the organ in a non-Catholic church as a help to the religious service (S.O., July 8, 1889), or to be a member of the choir during services, but it is not wrong, scandal apart, to take part in musical festivals in such places. A Catholic organist might continue in his post so long as he was in grave necessity, apart from serious scandal.

I am incline to agree with Rev. Father Davis in his assessment of organ playing in a non-Catholic service. The only excusing factors, which would have to exist simultaneously, are:

1) A very grave necessity (in the particular predicament in question, it is of a financial nature I suppose), and

2) The absence of proximate occasion of sins against the faith, either (a) by exposing oneself foolhardily to the heretical teachings when one is not well-established in the profession and practice of the Catholic faith; or (b) by scandalizing fellow Catholics and the non-Catholics that partake in that service (e.g., giving the impression that it is alright for a traditional Catholic to co-operate actively in a non-Catholic religious function, in light of the propagation of the false ecuмenism of "Vatican II," or giving the impression that the public cult of non-Catholics is to be tolerated and, consequently, their errors are also to be tolerated).

It is the second factor that merits exceedingly careful consideration, in light of the pertinent disciplinary norms of the Code of Canon Law, promulgated by Pope Benedict XV in the Apostolic Constitution Providentissima Mater (27 May 1917; A.A.S., vol. IX, pars II [1917]).

Rev. Frs. John A. Abbo and Jerome D. Hannan, in expounding upon Canon 1258 in their monumental work The Sacred Canons: A Concise Presentation of the Current Disciplinary Norms of the Church  (vol. II, pp. 512-514; St. Louis, MO: B. Herder Book Co., 1957), explicitly state that the

Particular acts of active participation that are forbidden are indicated herewith.

[...]

e) It is not allowed a Catholic to play the organ or sing in connection with the religious services of non-Catholics.

Regarding the passive or merely material presence of a Catholic in a non-Catholic religious function, Rev. Frs. Abbo and Hannan state that this may be tolerated for a serious reason, "provided there is involved no danger of perversion or scandal." Whensoever there is doubt, the local ordinary would be the one to assess the seriousness of the reason in order to either permit or prohibit this passive or material presence. However, it is clearly stated:

It is clear that only a serious reason justifies even passive presence. This kind of presence excludes any participation in the  services and forbids praying, singing, the carrying of candles, in company with the non-Catholic participants.

To conclude, dear Vladimir, it is my private opinion, based on the principles taught by the authors above-mentioned, that you ought to seek another sort of employment as soon as possible, since the reactions that have been expressed in response to your query clearly show that there is danger of scandal by playing the organ in a Protestant service, especially because of the present day errors concomitant with the false ecuмenism of "Vatican II." Whatever contractual obligations you have incurred that entail your participation as an organist in these functions are null and void because you cannot agree and you cannot be bound to something that would involve the violation of natural and divine positive law, such as the prohibition of active participation in non-Catholic religious functions. If there is a question of restitution for a contractual obligation or debt, you must seek to satisfy this obligation in another manner.

Again, this is merely my perspective, and you must again seek the counsel of your Father Confessor in light of the above-mentioned principles. The pages cited above are attached, so that you and the other forum members may see for yourselves what these authors say, and not rely on my faulty judgment and limited effability.

Please be assured of my prayers.