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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

Author Topic: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO  (Read 9335 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sgt Rock USMC

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 58
  • Reputation: +46/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Christ the King Militia
Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
« Reply #45 on: July 27, 2021, 08:13:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Emile on July 26, 2021, 04:51:14 PM
    Your fellow Marine, who is a heretic, gets killed saving your life. Do you attend his funeral?
    No
    Logged

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-486
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #46 on: July 27, 2021, 08:26:48 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on July 27, 2021, 05:51:29 AM
    No one's honor is at stake, of this there is no doubt - scratch this reason for going.
    No, "honor" here IS the relevant reason. By your presence, you honor the deceased or the person(s) the ceremony is about.

    Thus you can attend the funeral to honor a deceased relative, or deceased friend, or a deceased head of state (an example of honoring someone you may never have met).

    Doing so is an act of virtue, but as a non-theological virtue it can be limited by potentially giving scandal or endangering one's faith.

    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15287
    • Reputation: +6251/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #47 on: July 27, 2021, 08:28:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Emile on July 27, 2021, 08:10:43 AM
    This work has a slightly different English translation that might make the meaning clearer for you:
    https://archive.org/details/pointsofchurchla0000slat/page/21/mode/1up
    You seem to be misunderstanding "honoris". From the Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin (Leo F. Stelton): "honor, distinction, esteem, reward, acknowledgement"
    As for doubt simply reread the sentence:
    In doubtful cases the reason for assisting must be grave, and recognized as such by the Bishop
    The slightly different translation may help as well. Sorry, I don't have time right now to type it out.
    From your link......

    Quote
    ...Still, his passive presence may be misunderstood. It may be looked upon as giving some sort of approbation or recognition to the claims of a false religion, or it may be a cause of scandal to others, or there may be danger of relaxing one's own religious fibre and giving in to the spirit of religious indifference.

    For these reasons it is better, as a general rule, to keep away altogether from non-Catholic religious services as far as is possible. However, at times this is scarcely possible.
    So the general rule is to keep away, the general rule is *not* to go, sit in the back and not participate.

    He then gives a few good examples of what is meant by "honor/respect or civil office"....
     
    Quote
    A Catholic may be a registrar of marriages, and his office may require him to assist at a Protestant marriage in his official capacity. Or a Catholic tenant may be expected to be present at the funeral of his Protestant landlord. In these and similar cases the second section of Canon 1258 says that the passive presence of Catholics at non-Catholic religious services may be tolerated, if there be a good reason, and if there be no danger of perversion or of scandal. The duties of some special office or the need of showing respect will furnish the good reason required, and in such cases there will not be much danger of perversion or of scandal. In case of doubt whether the reason is sufficiently grave the canon requires that the bishop be consulted.

    Logged
    "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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15287
    • Reputation: +6251/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #48 on: July 27, 2021, 08:34:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stanley N on July 27, 2021, 08:26:48 AM
    No, "honor" here IS the relevant reason. You honor the deceased or the people the ceremony is about by your presence.
    How exactly is it honoring or respecting either the daughter or parents by their passive presence at non-Catholic wedding ceremony due to the daughter refusing to marry in a Catholic ceremony? Please explain.
    Logged
    "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 Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-486
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #49 on: July 27, 2021, 08:43:57 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on July 27, 2021, 08:34:22 AM
    How exactly is it honoring or respecting either the daughter or parents by their passive presence at non-Catholic wedding ceremony due to the daughter refusing to marry in a Catholic ceremony? Please explain.
    Your presence at a wedding is you giving honor to the couple getting married. The only reason you're there is the wedding, unless you happen to be a member of the church where the wedding occurs.

    Your question is conflating another issue. If a Catholic were to marry outside the Church (without dispensation, so invalid), you couldn't go (due to potentially giving scandal).
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15287
    • Reputation: +6251/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #50 on: July 27, 2021, 09:33:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stanley N on July 27, 2021, 08:43:57 AM
    Your presence at a wedding is you giving honor to the couple getting married. The only reason you're there is the wedding, unless you happen to be a member of the church where the wedding occurs.

    Your question is conflating another issue. If a Catholic were to marry outside the Church (without dispensation, so invalid), you couldn't go (due to potentially giving scandal).
    You may think that my passive presence at a non-Catholic wedding gives honor or respect to the couple, but I think it is actually viewed as nothing other than my approval of them getting married in a non-Catholic service. I see no honor in that.

    I accept that they are (getting) married, but while I may have a want to be present, I have no need to be there for it, nor does my passive presence do anything for the good of their souls, and in that regard, if anything, it only makes matters worse.
    Logged
    "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 Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-486
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #51 on: July 27, 2021, 09:56:52 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on July 27, 2021, 09:33:26 AM
    You may think that my passive presence at a non-Catholic wedding gives honor or respect to the couple, but I think it is actually viewed as nothing other than my approval of them getting married in a non-Catholic service. I see no honor in that.
    Even if the couple are themselves non-Catholic?

    We have social ties with our friends and associates, some of whom are likely non-Catholic. There are limits and other considerations, but if my non-Catholic co-worker invites me to his son's non-Catholic wedding, it's at least a possibility that attending is the most virtuous course of action. 

    Providence may even lead to other benefits. I may later pull on the same social ties and invite him to my son's Catholic wedding, which might start my co-worker on the path to conversion.
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 15287
    • Reputation: +6251/-924
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #52 on: July 27, 2021, 10:34:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stanley N on July 27, 2021, 09:56:52 AM
    Even if the couple are themselves non-Catholic?

    We have social ties with our friends and associates, some of whom are likely non-Catholic. There are limits and other considerations, but if my non-Catholic co-worker invites me to his son's non-Catholic wedding, it's at least a possibility that attending is the most virtuous course of action.

    Providence may even lead to other benefits. I may later pull on the same social ties and invite him to my son's Catholic wedding, which might start my co-worker on the path to conversion.
    My reply was referencing the OP's situation.

    For me, I do not go to any non-Catholic wedding or funeral services no matter what...I went to one NO funeral once about 20+ years ago and will never do that again, it was beyond sickening.

    Anyway, consider that your thoughts regarding the conversion of a non-Catholic coming to your son's wedding, which is noble,  fine and very good! But it might well be the same thoughts non-Catholics have regarding a Catholic going to their wedding - which is a reason why the general rule is to stay away from non-Catholic ceremonies.     
    Logged
    "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 Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13170
    • Reputation: +8294/-2565
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #53 on: July 27, 2021, 10:46:42 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    It is unlawful for Catholics to assist actively in any way at, or take part in, the religious services of non-Catholics.
    A passive or merely material presence may be tolerated, for reasons of civil duty or honor, at funerals, weddings, and similar celebrations, provided no danger of perversion or scandal arises from this assistance. In doubtful cases the reason for assisting must be grave, and recognized as such by the Bishop.

    1.  "Civil duty or honor" is one, complete thought.  You guys are dishonestly separating the 2 into 2 different reasons.  FALSE.
    2.  You can attend weddings/funerals (not masses), for the reason in #1.  "Civil duty or honor". 
    3.  What is civil duty/honor?  This would be if a catholic mayor had to attend the death of a protestant senator or a protestant governor, or a protestant civil leader.  This has to do with GOVERNMENT; that's what civil means.
    .
    4.  Even if you water-down the "honor" reason to include family/friends, there is NO ALLOWANCE for attending a sunday service, merely funerals/weddings are allowed. 
    5.  The reason for family/friends is not grave, so that's another watering-down you've done.
    .
    6.  None of this includes an allowance for attending an illicit mass.  Canon Law is clear on this.  Attending illicit masses are a mortal sin.
    7.  None of this includes an allowance for attending masses from heretic priests (of the new rite or any heretics).  Attending heretic masses is a mortal sin, per canon law.
    8.  None of this includes an allowance for attending masses which are profane, sacrilegious, or blasphemous.  Canon law forbids attendance at such, under grave sin.
    9.  Doubfully valid masses = also grave sin, per canon law.
    .
    10.  The worst error/lie you all commit is self-defining a new mass as a protestant service, so you can use the above canon to your liking.  Such a shameful, deceitful act.  You self-interpret whatever you want, to fit your own desires and your own version of Traditionalism.  Such pride, such spiritual immaturity.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13170
    • Reputation: +8294/-2565
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #54 on: July 27, 2021, 10:49:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2

    • Quote
    Not everyone in Tradition has held to the ultra rigorist position that Fr. Wathen did. 
    Yes, in the 70s and 80s, most did.  They had no other choice.  You either said the TLM outside of new-rome's authority, or you said the new mass along with the Modernists.  The lines were drawn back then.
    .

    Quote
    Archbishop Lefebvre didn't.  Bishop Williamson doesn't.

    They did agree, in theory.  They also softened, over time, especially after the 1988 indult came into existence.
    Logged

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1957
    • Reputation: +519/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #55 on: July 27, 2021, 10:58:46 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on July 27, 2021, 10:49:34 AM
    Yes, in the 70s and 80s, most did.  They had no other choice.  You either said the TLM outside of new-rome's authority, or you said the new mass along with the Modernists.  The lines were drawn back then.
    .

    They did agree, in theory.  They also softened, over time, especially after the 1988 indult came into existence.
    I can't speak to numbers, but archbishop Lefebvre told people they could attend the new mass FOR SUNDAY OBLIGATION if they felt obliged to which is a lot further than anyone here is even arguing for.  I've never heard any traditional clergy EXCEPT fr wathen say you can't go to a new mass for a funeral or wedding.  Now there probably are some, maybe they're correct, but that's definitely not a requirement to be a traditional Catholic just because you say it is.  Your accusing everyone who disagrees of bad will is uncharacteristically dimondite as well.  
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13170
    • Reputation: +8294/-2565
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #56 on: July 27, 2021, 11:03:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Pax, you're basically saying that anyone who doesn't agree with the position of one particular Trad priest isn't a real trad, accusing of bad will, etc.  Its the kind of thing that isn't typical of you, and its somewhat surprising in this case.

    No, that's not what I'm saying.  You can disagree with Fr Wathen on the DEGREE of evil of the new mass, but you cannot say that the new mass is ok, and call yourself a Trad.  There are many things in Tradition which are open for a debate (sede, BOD), this is not one of them.  Traditionalism was founded as a 1:1 reaction against the new mass.  This is a historical fact and cannot be debated.  To say otherwise is revisionist history, which imperils all the souls of the youth today (who weren't alive then), and I won't tolerate it.
    .
    The secondary issue is the false interpretation of this canon, to apply to the new mass, ignoring ALL OTHER canons which apply AGAINST the new mass.  Such a reading of canon law is false, stupid, uncatholic and ridiculous. 
    .
    All of you who would *passively* attend a new mass would (I hope) shudder in horror, if you were asked by a "family member" to *passively* follow her into an abortion clinic and watch the procedure.  You rightly see the evils against natural law, for God has written these laws onto every man's heart.  But you fail to see the evils of the new mass because one cannot reason to evils against Faith or supernatural goods.  Such recognition only comes from one's conscience (if it is properly formed) and also by actual grace.
    .
    My chastising you all is an actual grace.  This is the only way you'll recognize the evils of the new mass, for your consciences are weak on the subject.  Hate me if you want, but this is for your own good.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13170
    • Reputation: +8294/-2565
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #57 on: July 27, 2021, 11:06:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    your accusing everyone who disagrees of bad will is uncharacteristically dimondite as well. 
    Emile is of bad will because he is illogically self-interpreting the canon.  That's plain.
    .
    Others are of bad will because they don't know history, and want to create their own idea of why Traditionalism started.  Most are converts so they wouldn't know.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13170
    • Reputation: +8294/-2565
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #58 on: July 27, 2021, 11:08:12 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    but archbishop Lefebvre told people they could attend the new mass FOR SUNDAY OBLIGATION if they felt obliged to which is a lot further than anyone here is even arguing for.

    He didn't say that, but attached numerous distinctions and qualifications.  You're saying the above is wrong.  Why would you write it?
    Logged

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-486
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The real issue between occasionally and never attending NO
    « Reply #59 on: July 27, 2021, 11:36:12 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on July 27, 2021, 11:03:43 AM
    But you fail to see the evils of the new mass because one cannot reason to evils against Faith or supernatural goods. 
    And yet the Church pre-V2 permitted Catholics to passively attend non-Cathoic services despite those services' evils against the Faith.
    Quote
    The secondary issue is the false interpretation of this canon, to apply to the new mass

    No, we are not saying Canon 1258 applies to the new mass. Among other reasons, the new mass has the appearances of an approved Catholic rite. It's an argument by analogy from something we assumed you would accept.
    Quote
    Such recognition only comes from one's conscience (if it is properly formed) and also by actual grace. 
    My chastising you all is an actual grace.
    Has it ever occurred to you that that perhaps your conscience is not properly formed? Perhaps those chastizing you are vehicles of actual graces for you?

    Logged
    Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
    « previous next »