Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Are una cuм Masses sinful?  (Read 8614 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline 2Vermont

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11528
  • Reputation: +6470/-1191
  • Gender: Female
Re: Are una cuм Masses sinful?
« Reply #75 on: July 20, 2024, 06:02:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Maybe in the USA. But in the rest of the world it's a question of maturity. My mother made her First Communion at 5yo, me at 6yo, lots of my nephews and nieces at 5yo. It's up to the parents and the priest to decide. No hard and fast rule.
    OK.  Thank you.  I did not realize this. 

    Offline Comrade

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 198
    • Reputation: +89/-19
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are una cuм Masses sinful?
    « Reply #76 on: July 20, 2024, 06:44:29 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • 01:54 AM
    Quote
    "This famous Una cuм of the sedevacantists...ridiculous! ridiculous .... it’s ridiculous, it's ridiculous. In fact it is not at all the meaning of the prayer"- Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, retreat at St-Michel en Brenne, April 1st, 1989
    Would anyone have a quote from Archbishop Lefebvre defining the meaning of the prayer? To me this quote is worthless unless it is followed with Magesterial teaching backing it up. 


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14751
    • Reputation: +6085/-907
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are una cuм Masses sinful?
    « Reply #77 on: July 21, 2024, 04:41:09 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • 01:54 AMWould anyone have a quote from Archbishop Lefebvre defining the meaning of the prayer? To me this quote is worthless unless it is followed with Magesterial teaching backing it up.
    Archbishop Lefebvre and the sedevacantists
    Concerning the position of Archbishop Lefebvre on the “non una cuм” sedevacantist position, after the Episcopal consecrations of 1988; here is an excerpt from a conference given by Archbishop Lefebvre during a retreat preached to the sisters of Saint-Michel en Brenne 1, France, on April 1st, 1989 (AUDIO excerpt attached).

    « … And then, he (Dom Guillou O.S.B. 2) goes through all the prayers of the Canon, all the prayers of the Roman Canon. He goes through them one after the other and then he shows the difference, he gives translations, very good ones. He gives, for example, precisely this famous.. you know, this famous una cuм.., una cuм of the sedevacantists. And you, do you say una cuм? (laughter of the nuns of St-Michel-en-Brenne). You say una cuм in the Canon of the Mass! Then we cannot pray with you; then you’re not Catholic; you’re not this; you’re not that; you’re not.. Ridiculous! ridiculous! because they claim that when we say una cuм summo Pontifice, the Pope, isn’t it, with the Pope, so therefore you embrace everything the Pope says. It’s ridiculous! It’s ridiculous! In fact, this is not the meaning of the prayer.

    Te igitur clementissime Pater. This is the first prayer of the Canon. So here is how Dom Guillou translates it, a very accurate translation, indeed :
    “We therefore pray Thee with profound humility, most merciful Father, and we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Our Lord, to accept and to bless these gifts, these presents, these sacrifices, pure and without blemish, which we offer Thee firstly for Thy Holy Catholic Church. May it please Thee to give Her peace, to keep Her, to maintain Her in unity, and to govern Her throughout the earth, and with Her, Thy servant our Holy Father the Pope.”

    It is not said in this prayer that we embrace all ideas that the Pope may have or all the things he may do. With Her, your servant our Holy Father the Pope, our Bishop and all those who practice the Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox faith! So to the extent where, perhaps, unfortunately, the Popes would no longer have …, nor the bishops…, would be deficient in the Orthodox, Catholic and Apostolic Faith, well, we are not in union with them, we are not with them, of course. We pray for the Pope and all those who practice the Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox faith!

    Then he (Dom Guillou) had a note about that to clarify a little:
    “In the official translation, based on a critical review of Dom Botte O.S.B. 3, the UNA cuм or “in union with” of the sedevacantists of any shade is no longer equivalent but to the conjunction “and ” reinforced either by the need to restate the sentence, or to match the solemn style of the Roman canon. Anyway, every Catholic is always in union with the Pope in the precise area where the divine assistance is exercised, infallibility confirmed by the fact that as soon as there is a deviation from the dogmatic Tradition, the papal discourse contradicts itself.

    Let us collect the good grain, knowing that for the rest, it is more necessary than ever to ask God, with the very ancient Major Litanies, that be “kept in the holy religion” the “holy orders” and the “Apostolic Lord” himself (that is to say the Pope): UT DOMINUM APOSTOLIcuм AND OMNES ECCLESIASTICOS ORDINES IN SANCTA RELIGIONE CONSERVARE DIGNERIS, TE ROGAMUS, AUDI NOS.”

    It is a request of the litanies of the Saints, right? WE ASK TO KEEP THE POPE IN THE TRUE RELIGION. We ask that in the Litanies of the Saints! This proves that sometimes it can happen that unfortunately, well, maybe sometimes it happens that… well there have been hesitations, there are false steps, there are errors that are possible. We have too easily believed since Vatican I, that every word that comes from the mouth of the Pope is infallible. That was never said in Vatican I! The Council never said such a thing. Very specific conditions are required for the infallibility; very, very strict conditions. The best proof is that throughout the Council, Pope Paul VI himself said “There is nothing in this Council which is under the sign of infallibility”. So, it is clear, he says it himself! He said it explicitly.

    Then we must not keep this idea which is FALSE! which a number of Catholics, poorly instructed, poorly taught, believe! So obviously, people no longer understand anything, they are completely desperate, they do not know what to expect! We must keep the Catholic faith as the Church teaches it. »

    Archbishop Lefebvre, retreat at Saint-Michel en Brenne, April 1st, 1989

    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6790
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Are una cuм Masses sinful?
    « Reply #78 on: July 21, 2024, 07:17:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is a request of the litanies of the Saints, right? WE ASK TO KEEP THE POPE IN THE TRUE RELIGION. We ask that in the Litanies of the Saints! This proves that sometimes it can happen that unfortunately, well, maybe sometimes it happens that… well there have been hesitations, there are false steps, there are errors that are possible. We have too easily believed since Vatican I, that every word that comes from the mouth of the Pope is infallible. That was never said in Vatican I! The Council never said such a thing. Very specific conditions are required for the infallibility; very, very strict conditions. The best proof is that throughout the Council, Pope Paul VI himself said “There is nothing in this Council which is under the sign of infallibility”. So, it is clear, he says it himself! He said it explicitly.

    +ABL points out [I paraphrase here] that we ask in the 'Litanies of the Saints' to keep the pope in the true religion. He then says that this proves that sometimes it can happen, unfortunately, there have been hesitations, false steps, and errors, and that we have too easily believed since Vatican 1 that every word that comes out of the mouth of the Pope is infallible. That was never said in Vatican1. The Council never said such a thing. 

    I myself have prayed the litany of the saints many times over the last few months, so here's the two passages in that prayer that refer to the Pope:

    Page 6 of the Litany of the Saints:
    "Let us pray for our Sovereign Pontiff N. The Lord preserve him, give him life upon the earth and deliver him not up to the will of his enemies."

    Page 8 of the Litany of the Saints:
    "Almighty, everlasting God, have mercy upon thy servant N., our Sovereign Pontiff, and direct him according to thy clemency into the way of everlasting salvation, that by thy grace he may both desire those things that are pleasing to thee, and perform them with all his strength."

    From the words of these prayers, it seems evident that it is possible for a Pope to err, but the sedevacantists believe that a true pope cannot ever err. That's what +ABL seems to be saying here. The prayer also asks that the Pope not be delivered up to the will of his enemies, but don't the sedevacantists believe that it's not possible for a true pope to be delivered up the will of his enemies? 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29