Author Topic: greek orthodox funeral, or a novus orderwedding (Read 5058 times)

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #15 on:** January 16, 2014, 11:58:10 PM »

Quote from: gooch

Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: gooch
Where do you stand on attending a greek orthodox funeral, or a wedding at a novus order church

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you’ (II Jo

Attending anything involving an NO "mass" makes one complicit to sacrilege. It's either mimicking something sacred or it's being irreverent to something sacred--it's sacrilege either way.

I agree, how about attending the wake, what guidelines do you use, for example someone who didn't lead a very catholic life dies, your friend is the brother, do you go? basically all of my friends don't lead a very catholic life, their parents die, should I go to the wake ..all of them are novus ordo

There's nothing wrong going to the "wake," the Catholic way to say it, though is to call it the "viewing of the body." There's a grand difference between going to the viewing of the body, than going to the funeral. Out of respect, going to the viewing is appropriate, but abstaining from attending a protestant or novus ordo funeral would be the right thing to do. Stay away from those.

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #16 on:** January 17, 2014, 12:59:06 AM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

The Church allows passive attendance at non-Catholic services if civic duty compels us to.

*

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #17 on:** January 17, 2014, 04:12:37 PM »

Quote from: parentsfortruth

Quote from: gooch
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: gooch
Where do you stand on attending a greek orthodox funeral, or a wedding at a novus order church

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you’ (II Jo

Attending anything involving an NO "mass" makes one complicit to sacrilege. It's either mimicking something sacred or it's being irreverent to something sacred--it's sacrilege either way.

I agree, how about attending the wake, what guidelines do you use, for example someone who didn't lead a very catholic life dies, your friend is the brother, do you go? basically all of my friends don't lead a very catholic life, their parents die, should I go to the wake ..all of them are novus ordo

There's nothing wrong going to the "wake," the Catholic way to say it, though is to call it the "viewing of the body." There's a grand difference between going to the viewing of the body, than going to the funeral. Out of respect, going to the viewing is appropriate, but abstaining from attending a protestant or novus ordo funeral would be the right thing to do. Stay away from those.

I agree, do you distinguish between a novus order, greek orthodox and Jєωιѕн wake, as of now I would attend the novus order, definitely not the Jєωιѕн.... the greek orthodox has me stumped, I have a sister in law who's greek orthodox so that's why I want to make sure

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #18 on:** January 17, 2014, 04:41:51 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandyla
[/quote

how can you be 100% sure when Pope Pius XI says "take part" that it doesn't include passive attendance...for example there's an assembly of jews at some circuмcision ceremony, you go..aren't you taking part in it by simply attending? I think you would be taking a chance by merely attending ...but the other quote you gave seems to contradict this one.

We can be certain because the Church's own law, which is protected from approving error, says that circuмstance can allow passive attendance.

[/quote]

"It is illicit for Catholics in any way to assist actively or take part in sacred worship of non-Catholics (c. 1258/1). Passive or merely material presence, for sake of civil courtesy, duty or respect, for a grave reason which in case of doubt should have the approval of the Bishop may be tolerated at the funerals, weddings and other such celebration of non-Catholics, provided there is no danger of perversion or of scandal (c. 1258/2).
so according to this if want to go to a greek orthodox funeral for a relative I can as long as there's no danger of perversion or of scandal..which I'm not sure what that would entail...I just se this as contradicting the pope's quote on the assembly of non catholics

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #19 on:** January 17, 2014, 07:10:14 PM »

Quote from: gooch

Quote from: Mithrandyla
[/quote

how can you be 100% sure when Pope Pius XI says "take part" that it doesn't include passive attendance...for example there's an assembly of jews at some circuмcision ceremony, you go..aren't you taking part in it by simply attending? I think you would be taking a chance by merely attending ...but the other quote you gave seems to contradict this one.

We can be certain because the Church's own law, which is protected from approving error, says that circuмstance can allow passive attendance.

"It is illicit for Catholics in any way to assist actively or take part in sacred worship of non-Catholics (c. 1258/1). Passive or merely material presence, for sake of civil courtesy, duty or respect, for a grave reason which in case of doubt should have the approval of the Bishop may be tolerated at the funerals, weddings and other such celebration of non-Catholics, provided there is no danger of perversion or of scandal (c. 1258/2).
so according to this if want to go to a greek orthodox funeral for a relative I can as long as there's no danger of perversion or of scandal..which I'm not sure what that would entail...I just se this as contradicting the pope's quote on the assembly of non catholics[/quote]

If you see Catholic teaching contradicting prior teaching then the problem is with your understanding, not with one of the teachings. There is a difference between active participation and passive attendance. It's not a difficult concept.

I've given you what approved canonists have to say about the canon. Rely on their judgement, not your own.

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #20 on:** January 17, 2014, 07:29:43 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Quote from: gooch
Quote from: Mithrandyla
[/quote

how can you be 100% sure when Pope Pius XI says "take part" that it doesn't include passive attendance...for example there's an assembly of jews at some circuмcision ceremony, you go..aren't you taking part in it by simply attending? I think you would be taking a chance by merely attending ...but the other quote you gave seems to contradict this one.

We can be certain because the Church's own law, which is protected from approving error, says that circuмstance can allow passive attendance.

"It is illicit for Catholics in any way to assist actively or take part in sacred worship of non-Catholics (c. 1258/1). Passive or merely material presence, for sake of civil courtesy, duty or respect, for a grave reason which in case of doubt should have the approval of the Bishop may be tolerated at the funerals, weddings and other such celebration of non-Catholics, provided there is no danger of perversion or of scandal (c. 1258/2).
so according to this if want to go to a greek orthodox funeral for a relative I can as long as there's no danger of perversion or of scandal..which I'm not sure what that would entail...I just se this as contradicting the pope's quote on the assembly of non catholics

If you see Catholic teaching contradicting prior teaching then the problem is with your understanding, not with one of the teachings. There is a difference between active participation and passive attendance. It's not a difficult concept.

I've given you what approved canonists have to say about the canon. Rely on their judgement, not your own.[/quote]

you maybe right but can you see why it's not so clear cut for me
Pope Pius XI,
Mortalium Animos
(# 10), Jan. 6, 1928: “...
this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in
the assemblies of non-Catholics...”

here you're interpreting the Pope's "take part" to mean active participation only, that he allowed passive attendance...I'm just not 100% sure

here's another quote to make me pause

Pope Pius VI,
Charitas
(# 31-32), April 13, 1791, speaking of priests who went along with
the notoriously heretical civil constitution of the clergy in France: “Above all, avoid and
condemn the sacrilegious intruders...do not hold communion with them especially in
divine worship .”
Speaking of priests who belong to the “Old Catholic” sect, which publicly rejects Vatican I and its
definition on Papal Infallibility, Pope Pius IX declared:
Pope Pius IX,
Graves ac diuturnae
(# 4), March 23, 1875: “
They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings,
and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established
to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with
them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any
jurisdiction.”

Canon 1258.1, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “It is
not licit for the faithful by any manner to
assist actively or to have a part in the sacred rites of non-Catholics.”

so here the "have a part " means what exactly? it can't mean assist actively ...doesn't i logically mean passive attendance?

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #21 on:** January 17, 2014, 07:36:34 PM »

Read the quote from Bouscaren and Ellis again. There is a difference, they explain it, and if you don't understand it I can't help you.

2Vermont · « **Reply #22 on:** January 18, 2014, 06:18:22 AM »

Gooch, I have highlighted this from MD's quotes:

It is conceivable that even merely passive presence might be accompanied by an internal intention to approve, assent to, or encourage the non-Catholic worship; if that were true it would be formal cooperation in an evil act, and forbidden by the natural law.

From what I can see, this is where they distinguish the "take part" in passive attendance.

Maybe this will help.

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #23 on:** January 18, 2014, 07:18:05 AM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Gooch, I have highlighted this from MD's quotes:

It is conceivable that even merely passive presence might be accompanied by an internal intention to approve, assent to, or encourage the non-Catholic worship; if that were true it would be formal cooperation in an evil act, and forbidden by the natural law.

From what I can see, this is where they distinguish the "take part" in passive attendance.

Maybe this will help.

Vermont , thanks, I agree if we take the canon alone then yes passive attendance maybe acceptable,the question now becomes do we simply ignore the past statement from popes ? like this one, does this statment not make you think twice? or is it just me?

Pope Pius IX’s encyclical, Graves ac diuturnae. Speaking of the “Old Catholic” heretics and schismatics, Pius IX says:

Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (# 4), March 23, 1875: “They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction.”

2Vermont · « **Reply #24 on:** January 18, 2014, 09:55:55 AM »

Quote from: gooch

Quote from: 2Vermont
Gooch, I have highlighted this from MD's quotes:

It is conceivable that even merely passive presence might be accompanied by an internal intention to approve, assent to, or encourage the non-Catholic worship; if that were true it would be formal cooperation in an evil act, and forbidden by the natural law.

From what I can see, this is where they distinguish the "take part" in passive attendance.

Maybe this will help.

Vermont , thanks, I agree if we take the canon alone then yes passive attendance maybe acceptable,the question now becomes do we simply ignore the past statement from popes ? like this one, does this statment not make you think twice? or is it just me?

Pope Pius IX’s encyclical, Graves ac diuturnae. Speaking of the “Old Catholic” heretics and schismatics, Pius IX says:

Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (# 4), March 23, 1875: “They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction.”

Someone smarter than me will chime in I hope, but I am going to guess that in this case we would be talking about scandal. Given the time in Church history even passive attendance would be cause for scandal (which is something the aforementioned canon 1258 talks about).

Ambrose · « **Reply #25 on:** January 18, 2014, 04:15:09 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: gooch
Quote from: 2Vermont
Gooch, I have highlighted this from MD's quotes:

It is conceivable that even merely passive presence might be accompanied by an internal intention to approve, assent to, or encourage the non-Catholic worship; if that were true it would be formal cooperation in an evil act, and forbidden by the natural law.

From what I can see, this is where they distinguish the "take part" in passive attendance.

Maybe this will help.

Vermont , thanks, I agree if we take the canon alone then yes passive attendance maybe acceptable,the question now becomes do we simply ignore the past statement from popes ? like this one, does this statment not make you think twice? or is it just me?

Pope Pius IX’s encyclical, Graves ac diuturnae. Speaking of the “Old Catholic” heretics and schismatics, Pius IX says:

Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (# 4), March 23, 1875: “They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction.”

Someone smarter than me will chime in I hope, but I am going to guess that in this case we would be talking about scandal. Given the time in Church history even passive attendance would be cause for scandal (which is something the aforementioned canon 1258 talks about).

This matter is for simple. Trust the Canon as it is infallibly protected and believe that the Canon cannot harm your soul.

A Catholic should never dig up proof texts against a Sacred Canon. The duty of a Catholic is to believe and obey.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #26 on:** January 18, 2014, 05:59:49 PM »

If an emergency worker was called to a scene at a protestant Church during a service, is he guilty of breaking this commandment?

If you're at a bus-stop and duck into a non-Catholic Church to use the bathroom while a service is going on, same question.

It's obvious that the material act of entering a building which is hosting non-Catholic worship is not sinful. The sin is when one is co-operating, participating or otherwise showing positive approval with the false religion.

Whether or not one sins by being in such a situation depends on several factors, all which have been mentioned already.

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #27 on:** February 03, 2014, 08:22:34 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: 2Vermont
Quote from: gooch
Quote from: 2Vermont
Gooch, I have highlighted this from MD's quotes:

It is conceivable that even merely passive presence might be accompanied by an internal intention to approve, assent to, or encourage the non-Catholic worship; if that were true it would be formal cooperation in an evil act, and forbidden by the natural law.

From what I can see, this is where they distinguish the "take part" in passive attendance.

Maybe this will help.

Vermont , thanks, I agree if we take the canon alone then yes passive attendance maybe acceptable,the question now becomes do we simply ignore the past statement from popes ? like this one, does this statment not make you think twice? or is it just me?

Pope Pius IX’s encyclical, Graves ac diuturnae. Speaking of the “Old Catholic” heretics and schismatics, Pius IX says:

Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (# 4), March 23, 1875: “They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction.”

Someone smarter than me will chime in I hope, but I am going to guess that in this case we would be talking about scandal. Given the time in Church history even passive attendance would be cause for scandal (which is something the aforementioned canon 1258 talks about).

This matter is for simple. Trust the Canon as it is infallibly protected and believe that the Canon cannot harm your soul.

A Catholic should never dig up proof texts against a Sacred Canon. The duty of a Catholic is to believe and obey.

can you give me your thoughts on attending
1. the after party of a barmitzvah
2. novus order funeral of a relative
3 Jєωιѕн wedding after party
4. greekorthodox wedding of relative
5 Jєωιѕн edding the ceremony

are all these ok according to the canon if I just attend and sit there?

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #28 on:** February 03, 2014, 09:19:33 PM »

So gooch, did you just wait to forget everything that transpired in this thread to post again?

To each of those instances listed:

Is there a grave reason to attend? If no, then you ought not to go. If yes, then:

Is there danger of perversion or scandal? If yes, then don't go. If no, then:

Is the attendance passive (as defined already within this thread)? If no, then don't go. If yes, then you're OK.

Conspiracy_Factist · « **Reply #29 on:** February 04, 2014, 05:01:01 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

So gooch, did you just wait to forget everything that transpired in this thread to post again?

To each of those instances listed:

Is there a grave reason to attend? If no, then you ought not to go. If yes, then:

Is there danger of perversion or scandal? If yes, then don't go. If no, then:

Is the attendance passive (as defined already within this thread)? If no, then don't go. If yes, then you're OK.

I've been rereading material and I'm not sure..but you say is there a grave reason to attend..what would constitute grave reason....basically it's funerals and batmitzvahs that I don't want to go to but my wife isn't traditional like me..I'm in a tough spot....I thought you were of the opinion that if it' s passive attendance it's ok..now you're telling me if there's no grave reason then even passive attendance is no good?