Let us pray that God will lead people away from such blasphemy.

Quote=SaintGobban

 I'm fairly new to this site, but I find that if one has been to one internet chat board, they've pretty much been to them all. And, I've been to lots.

My sincerest hope is that people who are really seeking answers do not use this site as a source.

Much of the information that is being given out here is in error. People just say whatever they think, and it is usually wrong. There really hasn't been very much teaching going on in the Church, real formation, real hard core catechesis, for a loooonnnnggg time.

But also, I believe there is a genuine element of evil both online and in the Church. There really are people whose sole aim is to misinform, confuse, agitate, invalidate what is true. The internet is really rife with that.

The internet, including this site, attracts people who hide behind the anonymity and only seem to want to provoke. So, if you sincerely want to know about Christ and the Catholic Church, go to someplace that you can trust. Someplace that has credibility. THIS IS NOT IT.

quote=ConstantineTG

Actually, my sincerest hope is that people who are seeking answers use this site. They can either go to "Ask an Apologist" or go to Catholic Answers website and read the articles there.

Also with some familiarity you will get to know the people who give good and accurate answers here. I always look to JREducation for all things Roman Catholic and Franciscan, and to Alexander Roman for all things Eastern. There are many regulars too who give great and accurate answers such as FrDavid in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum.

Being a forum, you have the same mix of people here as in the real world. When one goes foruming, one should understand that is to be the case. Unless its a highly regulated forum where only certified experts can answer, you'll always get a mix of answers no matter which forum it is, no matter what topic.
__________________

To many people here the notion of a Mass being "illicit" means next to nothing.

I have never understood how one can claim to be on the side of the Church when they knowingly and purposely attend Masses that they know are illicit. That, coupled with the fact that sspx priests are suspended of their duties and act in disobedience every time they celebrate Mass would seem (to me, at least) to be cause for concern.

But that's just me.

If you've ever attended a NO Mass where the priest said one word wrong or got one rubric wrong you've attended an "illicit" Mass. If you regularly attend a Mass where Eucharistic Ministers are used but are not absolutely needed, you are attending an "illicit" Mass.

You have received an infraction at Catholic Answers Forums.

Reason: Continuous violoation of rules, despite many infractions
-------
Your statement is incorrect, to begin with.

Second, it violates the forum rules that say you may not pit one form of the mass against the other.

Third, you have violated the rules too many times and you continue to do so.

Therefore, your account is suspended for one month. You cannot be on these fora and violate rules at a rate of one a month. If you want to participate on Catholic Answers, you must comply with our rules.

Masses are not valid or invalid, they are licit (in conformity with the law) or illicit (not in conformity with the law). It is the consecration of the Eucharist within the Mass that can be valid or invalid.

Whether a crucifix is present at the altar has no bearing on whether the Eucharist is valid or invalid (the absence of a crucifix will not cause the Eucharist to be invalid), but it does have a bearing on whether the Mass is licit or illicit.

The law requires that "There is to be a cross, clearly visible to the congregation, either on the altar or near it" (General Instruction of the Roman Missal [GIRM] 270). The revised General Instruction—which has not yet gone into effect—clarifies that the cross in question should have a corpus (representation of Christ’s body), meaning that it should be a crucifix rather than a bare cross.

If there were no cross by on or near the altar (or, once the new GIRM goes into effect, no crucifix) then the Mass would be illicit, or not celebrated in accord with the requirements of the law.

However, a Mass celebrated in this manner would still have a valid consecration of the Eucharist. Furthermore, it would still fulfill one’s Sunday obligation.

You heard people saying stuff like that long before Modernism.  That's just relativism, weak faith, humanism, whatever you want to call it.

You can't hold it agains the website that someone comes on and is a relativist.  But the scary thing is that only one person on the entire first page took him to task and corrected him.

Quote from: stevusmagnus

Thanks.

Yes, it was Casey.

At some point they need to question the very existence of a discussion forum, where the rules are interpreted so restrictively as to kill discussion. Also the rules are forced so arbitrarily and with no warning, you can't even make good faith posts without knowing whether you'll be suspended for a month. It is ridiculous.

I question the existence of CA's Trad forum.  It serves no other purpose than to let the NO trolls run rampant.  Nothing Traditional can be discussed without the NO trolls jumping in and creating havoc.   The trolls know that with Casey (as with the prior "mods"),  they can get away with disrupting any Traditional discussion.