Take heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them: otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven. - St. Matt. 6:1

So what if they refuse to wear masks? So what if any of us refuse to wear masks? No one is starving at this point because of such a light cross to bear. Going around before others stating how much of a rebel you are is not pious, it is not meek, it is not humble, it is pride. It is vainglory.

This family has chosen to go before the world via a Catholic outlet to show before all others their righteousness, so they have received their reward. As executive chefs, they clearly have the skills and blessings to provide for themselves without international air travel. An option 98% of the world doesn't have access to or the capability of utilizing.

I still have to wear a mask at work, so what? It's a minor cross I have to bear for 9 hours and then can take off when I step outside. I don't own the building, and I am required to obey the precepts of my employer in exchange for an income. They are not requiring the shot to the point of martyrdom, I have the option to refuse and have done so, because prudence dictates that as the line in the sand of this situation given the serious risks associated with it. But, if you choose to, does that make you less righteous? No. It doesn't.

I've said my share plenty about this situation. But what I keep seeing is a Luciferian spirit of rêbêllïon among many self-righteous individuals who reject whatever chastisements God has willed because they value their own will over His.

Accept your crosses with humility, patience and love, friends.

It would be interesting to hear about how many people have joined -- and left -- if the profile of the average parishioner has changed.

Let's put it this way -- the simple chapel population does NOT tell the whole story.

Where I live, we get ridiculous amounts of a rain for a month, then drought for 3/4 of a year -- but at the end of the year, we seem to have a "normal" amount of rain.
No, we had monsoons and flash flooding, followed by months of epic drought. It was almost never "normal".

If you came in from outside where it's 0 degrees, into a sauna where it was 150 degrees, is it true that you experienced an "average" temperature of 75 degrees? No, the average doesn't tell the whole story. You froze, and then you practically baked. At no point did you experience a beautiful 75 degree spring day.

Likewise, a bunch of people could have left, while 140% of that number could have joined from the Novus Ordo, diocese, indult. That wouldn't be a good thing for the SSPX.

Well, I recognise nearly all of the old faces, there are just a lot of new faces I have never seen at a Tridentine mass in my part of the country.  For example, yesterday there was a man in his early 70s who was very tall 6'4", slim and elegantly dressed and a couple with 3 daughters the same ages as my son and daughter.  These were the sort of people I would remember had I seen them before.
Where would longer term supporters of the SSPX go and what would their motivation be to leave?  I can only think of one, that they want to socially distance and wear a mask and almost nobody at the SSPX is doing that.  It is impossible anyway, the pews in the masses I have visited in the UK are 70 to 100% full.

Take heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them: otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven. - St. Matt. 6:1

So what if they refuse to wear masks? So what if any of us refuse to wear masks? No one is starving at this point because of such a light cross to bear. Going around before others stating how much of a rebel you are is not pious, it is not meek, it is not humble, it is pride. It is vainglory.

This family has chosen to go before the world via a Catholic outlet to show before all others their righteousness, so they have received their reward. As executive chefs, they clearly have the skills and blessings to provide for themselves without international air travel. An option 98% of the world doesn't have access to or the capability of utilizing.

I still have to wear a mask at work, so what? It's a minor cross I have to bear for 9 hours and then can take off when I step outside. I don't own the building, and I am required to obey the precepts of my employer in exchange for an income. They are not requiring the shot to the point of martyrdom, I have the option to refuse and have done so, because prudence dictates that as the line in the sand of this situation given the serious risks associated with it. But, if you choose to, does that make you less righteous? No. It doesn't.

I've said my share plenty about this situation. But what I keep seeing is a Luciferian spirit of rêbêllïon among many self-righteous individuals who reject whatever chastisements God has willed because they value their own will over His.

Accept your crosses with humility, patience and love, friends.

Yeah, there's some balance to be had in terms of masking.  So, for instance, if people own a private business they could specify that they don't allow people without masks in there ... and could just as easily specify that they won't serve people without a shirt or shoes, or wearing bikinis ... or even that a suite and tie are required.  It's their business.  If I don't like their restrictions, I won't patronize them.  Issue is more with government ... and then the corporations that blend together with government so that the separation is blurry (Google, Amazon, Walmart, etc.)

Also, there may be an obligation of charity.  Some people are absolutely terrified of COVID.  I knew one person who refused to leave her home the entire duration of the lockdown, would have groceries delivered, etc.  If it would cause someone else serious distress, there's not always an issue to wear a mask.  I don't always need to be making political statements.  Perhaps put on the mask and make some comments that would help them think.  Should I terrorize such a person to make some kind of point ... which would be lost on them anyway?  And to others witnessing it, I would just come across as an arrogant selfish jerk.

I've had a few contractors at my home a few times (plumber, HVAC, and other trades).  Each time they showed up wearing masks.  I told them immediately that they didn't have to wear it, but that I'd put one on if it made them uncomfortable for me not to have one on.  Every one of them immediately took off the mask and thanked me, and with a couple I struck up conversation where we both agreed that COVID was a fraud.  One HVAC guy doing a tune-up/check on my A/C said that one lady forced him to wear a mask outside in 90-degree weather ... while she was inside by herself, looking out the window with a mask on, and that he almost passed out due to wearing the mask in the heat.  So he was extremely relieved and thankful.

I've also seen anti-mask zealots who have gotten into physical altercations with a store employee who, making near minimum wage, was asked by his employer to request that the customers wear masks.  Some of them are just doing it because they are required to by their employers to keep their low-wage job.  So why take it out on the employee?  At least take your grievances to a manager or to the owner of the business.  Even if I have a serious complaint about some service, I make a point of never taking it out on the low-paid employee who's picking up the phone.

Given that there's nothing intrinsically wrong about wearing a mask, I don't feel any obligation to constantly be making political statements.  It's like the principles of prudence around fraternal correction.  One of the chief criteria here is whether you think it'll make a difference.  Let's say that, when masks were required, someone walked into a Walmart without a mask on.  What political statement is he making?  No one knows.  It might be that the person had a medical exemption or that he just forgot to put it on or that he merely objected to the inconvenience of wearing a mask (a selfish motive).  So it's not even as if it's necessarily sending some kind of message.  There's almost like a counter-virtue-signaling attitude from some people who refused to wear masks, that they're doing it to signal their superiority.

I have never attended a Mass where I was required to wear a mask and will never.

Going to Mass is NOT parallel to patronizing a business.  Lame comparison.
I realize that Mass was not the subject of the OP as well, but it has become a topic in the replies.

So you would miss your Sunday obligation instead of wearing a mask to Mass?

There were in fact a number of us who wore masks at Father Carley's chapel precisely so that Father Carley wouldn't get busted and have the authorities shut down the Mass.  And had Father Carley requested that people wear a mask, we would have complied ... because its his chapel.  So, no, it's not a lame comparison at all.

Simultaneously, in the southern part of the same state, Ohio, Father Jenkiins was dealing with complaints made to both the police and to the Health Department.  So he implemented various "safety protocols".  He even had to make a show of it by wearing a mask for the TV interview he did when the news stations went after them.  Purists would argue that he compromised, but it was coming down to either complying or shutting down.  And, yes, there is such a thing as anti-mask virtue signaling.  Who exactly are you convincing of anything by not wearing a mask?  To most people who see you without a mask on, you probably just come across as an arrogant jerk.  As for the anti-maskers who see you, you're preaching to the choir only.  Therefore you're accomplishing nothing.  You're better off ARTICULATING reasons against the mask where people could understand WHY.

I agree that it's a higher priority to keep Mass and the Sacraments available than to virtue signal their anti-masking.

https://tinyurl.com/w7uz9am8

So you would miss your Sunday obligation instead of wearing a mask to Mass?

There were in fact a number of us who wore masks at Father Carley's chapel precisely so that Father Carley wouldn't get busted and have the authorities shut down the Mass.  And had Father Carley requested that people wear a mask, we would have complied ... because its his chapel.  So, no, it's not a lame comparison at all.

In my personal opinion, I am fairly persuaded by the arguments of Peter Kwasinewski and others that wearing a mask at  mass is disrespectful and sacrilegious, so yes, if I literally had no option besides going to a mass that required them, I think I would stay home. I don't have the certainty of faith that I'm right on the subject, but I believe that I am. I wouldn't judge somebody who made the opposite choice, it's a difficult issue.
I don't blame Father Jenkins for doing what he did. The situation was sort of different between March and May of 2020. At that point the battle was to a large extent between those who were willing to make great sacrifices to continue to make the mass and sacraments available, and those who weren't. I do not take issue, during that situation where there was serious uncertainty regarding how deadly the disease was, and when there was still a semi-legitimate argument for flatten the curve, that father Jenkins simultaneously took as many precautions as he could while simultaneously putting God and the sacraments first. At that time I think that's a respectable stance.
Post June I view the issue differently. After that point if he came very clear, due to the way that BLM was treated, that everyone knew the disease was not as deadly as people originally thought. Furthermore it became very clear that flattened the curve was a lie and that the actual intent was to keep us as slaves at least until there is a vaccine. Under those circuмstances I do see a certain level of sacrilege in a church requiring compliance, it's also a major canonical issue which despite being a novus ordo Canon lawyer I think Cathy Caridi explained pretty well.
As a side technical point, I don't think most people really had mass obligations to break in this situation, though I don't know if a sede would view this differently. Personally while I think it is patently ridiculous that the obligation has been suspended for so long, and taking advantage of it will certainly hurt your soul, I would not see anyone as guilty of mortal sin if the bishop dispensed in their diocese and they therefore to not attend Mass. Though that's kind of a side point because I would always attend mass if I was ethically able to justify doing so regardless of whether there was an obligation or not

In my personal opinion, I am fairly persuaded by the arguments of Peter Kwasinewski and others that wearing a mask at  mass is disrespectful and sacrilegious,

 Obviously, Mr Kwasinewski doesn't know the meaning of the word 'sacrilegious'.
.

I do not take issue, during that situation where there was serious uncertainty regarding how dєαdlу the disease was, and when there was still a semi-legitimate argument for flatten the curve, that father Jenkins simultaneously took as many precautions as he could while simultaneously putting God and the sacraments first. At that time I think that's a respectable stance.

He had to do what he did, because America is now a communist country.  Most people don't yet realize this.
.

I would not see anyone as guilty of mortal sin if the bishop dispensed in their diocese and they therefore to not attend Mass.

Anyone that listened to their local bishop is already guilty of accepting the novus ordo.  So missing mass because of a pandemic pales in comparison to accepting daily/weekly new mass sacrilege for the past 50 years.

This is the kind of sanctimonious crap I was getting at. No, wearing a medical mask is not a violation of any Commandment. While to some it can be a symbol of intellectual assent to the "new religion", others may be wearing theirs out of simple obedience to local laws or even prudence.

I think the issue I have is that it's practically a humiliation ritual at this point, furthermore because the primary mechanism for human communication is through the face, the normalized covering of faces seems to be contra a Christian mindset and it seems extremely disrespectful to do that at mass. I am not judging anyone for the choices they make if they are faced with that being their only option or something like that, but in my opinion it is objectively disrespectful to worship God with a mask on and it's not something I'm okay with.

Pax, Ladislaus.  


Question for you guys.

If one could not find a chapel that did not require proof of c o v i d 19 vaccination, would you consider it a moral imperative to go get jabbed so you could attend mass? Assume for the sake of argument the ναccιnє was not tainted with aborted fetal cells, so it's not straight up immoral, it's just highly dangerous for all the reasons that I think we are all already concerned about it.

If a “Catholic” chapel required a ναccιnє to attend it, it seems to me that that would be a schismatic act.