Author Topic: "Cross bearer" removed in SSPX Post Falls liturgy. (Read 13429 times)

Machabees · « **Reply #45 on:** February 22, 2013, 03:08:34 PM »

Quote from: PAT317

For the sake of argument, let's assume Fr. Vassal is right, and that
1) to have a Cross-bearer is a violation of Canon Law,
2) It is in his conscience that he needs to remove the “abuse”, &
3) it is “objective”, then:

1) Why has the SSPX done it for over 40 years?
2) Now that someone realized it is an "abuse, and it is an "objective" matter of "conscience" to use it as they have, why doesn't the entire SSPX change it now, across the board, and announce why they must make the change?
3) How is something that is an "abuse, an "objective"
matter of "conscience" and a matter of "Canon Law" also at the same time "just a little thing"? :confused1:

Sorry, these arguments just don't hold water. And if we had a dollar for every time a change was made in the Novus Ordo, especially early on in the 1970s, we were told "it is just a little thing", we might all be rich.

Yes, these arguments just don't hold water.

The answer is evident and clear in the "nonchalant" attitude of Fr. Vassal, like all liberals, they try to skirt the issue and put "blame" on something else to get their agenda going.

If Fr. Vassal was really a true "pastor" of souls, he would not remove the Grace of the Cross for learning and education of our Religion; especially in this crisis of the Church. Rather, he should be supporting it; NOT put it in the trash bin!

These liberals always live behind a mask...

Quo Vadis Petre · « **Reply #46 on:** February 22, 2013, 03:14:45 PM »

The Cross-bearer isn't an abuse; it is the custom in the US. Outside of the US, though, it belongs only to the Prelate to have a CB. Still, this SSPX priest should not take it to himself to change custom just because he is from Europe or some other place not accustomed to having CBs. The reference to this is The Celebration of Mass, by J.B. Connell, 1962, p. 462.

Machabees · « **Reply #47 on:** February 22, 2013, 07:15:43 PM »

Remember in the earlier posts that Fr. Vassl had also said to the Post Falls Head M.C.:

Quote from: Machabees

He said, that he heard a lot about it from others and was concerned himself; and he had called the M.C. He said, according to the M.C., "father (Fr. Vassal the Prior) decided to remove the cross bearer because 'it was not in the rubrics' to have one without a procession." And, "that there was not enough room for the cross bearer in the sanctuary." [/i]

And that others had talked to Fr. Vassal about this issue:

Quote from: Machabees

Here is an update on the Post falls –cross bearer (crucifix) being removed from the sanctuary.

I just spoke to someone who lives there and attends that chapel. He said:

• Since Dec. 2, except for Christmas day, there has not been a cross bearer in any of the (normal) Sunday processions they regularly have.
• That the Prior, Fr. Vassal, is continuing his stance...amongst opposition.
• That a number of people have written letters to him…still awaiting a response.

Didn’t the Vat. II, New Order Church, also get rid of the crucifix -the standard of Christ- from the sanctuary, and from the mind’s eye of the faithful…?

And that:

Quote from: Machabees

Remember... No Prior or priest, can make any liturgical changes without permission coming from the top.

And that Fr. Vassal threw out of the Cross bearer from the St. Dominic's Girl's School AND the Carmelites in Spokane:

Quote from: AveMarisStella

Yes, the Sunday High Mass Cross Bearers at IC Post Falls, St. Dominic's Girl's School AND the Carmelites in Spokane Valley have been eliminated as per Fr. Vassal.[/b]

FOLKS, WHEN WILL YOU WAKE UP???????

Welcome to the Church of Fellay™. :dancing-banana: :dancing-banana:

So yes, there is a quiet agenda; just like Fr. Rostand has one, to also integrate the faithful into the conciliar church!

Did you ever notice, that since the Motu Proprio, the SSPX has been slackened in their "militancy"? You first start by not talking about things; then start to get rid of things; then you start talking like them; then you start to look like them; then you are absorbed into them!

Effective communism...!

Didn't our Lady of Fatima warn us of this...that Russia will spread her errors (communism)? It goes to all peoples; to all lands; and to all minds!

Our Lord said, Watch and Pray...!

PAT317 · « **Reply #48 on:** February 22, 2013, 07:49:41 PM »

Quote from: Machabees a while back

Remember in the earlier posts that Fr. Vassl had also said to the Post Falls Head M.C.:

Quote from: Machabees
He said, that he heard a lot about it from others and was concerned himself; and he had called the M.C. He said, according to the M.C., "father (Fr. Vassal the Prior) decided to remove the cross bearer because 'it was not in the rubrics' to have one without a procession." And, "that there was not enough room for the cross bearer in the sanctuary."

And that others had talked to Fr. Vassal about this issue:

Quote from: Machabees
...I just spoke to someone who lives there and attends that chapel. He said:

• Since Dec. 2, except for Christmas day, there has not been a cross bearer in any of the (normal) Sunday processions they regularly have.
• That the Prior, Fr. Vassal, is continuing his stance...amongst opposition.
• That a number of people have written letters to him…still awaiting a response.

Quote from: Machabees this week

...-   Well, yes, that is true. But it is a Law; so I need to remove it. It is still only a little problem. I do not think that people will mind once they know.
-   (Question) I mind! And many people in the parish are talking about this.
-   Why haven’t they come to me and say something? Then I will need to give a sermon on “rash judgment”.
-   It is just a little problem.
-   (Question) No, Fr. Vassal, it is a very big problem!
-   Well you are the only one that spoke to me. Why did you come to me so late to speak of this?
-   (Answer) Because you have not been here often doing masses; nor, when you were here, you did not come out after mass as you usually do....

So, am I understanding this right, that a while ago, it was said that "a number of people have written letters to him [Fr. Vassal?] …still awaiting a response", and now Fr. Vassal says "Well you are the only one that spoke to me"? :confused1:

Matthew · « **Reply #49 on:** February 22, 2013, 07:53:05 PM »

Quote from: Quo Vadis Petre

The Cross-bearer isn't an abuse; it is the custom in the US. Outside of the US, though, it belongs only to the Prelate to have a CB. Still, this SSPX priest should not take it to himself to change custom just because he is from Europe or some other place not accustomed to having CBs. The reference to this is The Celebration of Mass, by J.B. Connell, 1962, p. 462.

You hit the nail on the head.

The lack of cross bearer is NOT Novus Ordo. They still use cross bearers.

It's a custom in America to have one.

Unfortunately, it highlights another problem -- the "occupation" of all positions of power in the United States district of the SSPX by Frenchmen or other foreigners -- as if we don't have enough senior priests in this country to fill those positions.

The fact is: we used to. So they can't claim otherwise.

Bishop Fellay doesn't trust us Americans. That's why I'm amazed at some Accordistas gushing, "I trust Bishop Fellay". Why? He doesn't trust you!

Trust is earned!

Machabees · « **Reply #50 on:** February 22, 2013, 08:24:21 PM »

Quote from: PAT317

Quote from: Machabees a while back
Remember in the earlier posts that Fr. Vassl had also said to the Post Falls Head M.C.:

Quote from: Machabees
He said, that he heard a lot about it from others and was concerned himself; and he had called the M.C. He said, according to the M.C., "father (Fr. Vassal the Prior) decided to remove the cross bearer because 'it was not in the rubrics' to have one without a procession." And, "that there was not enough room for the cross bearer in the sanctuary."

And that others had talked to Fr. Vassal about this issue:

Quote from: Machabees
...I just spoke to someone who lives there and attends that chapel. He said:

• Since Dec. 2, except for Christmas day, there has not been a cross bearer in any of the (normal) Sunday processions they regularly have.
• That the Prior, Fr. Vassal, is continuing his stance...amongst opposition.
• That a number of people have written letters to him…still awaiting a response.

Quote from: Machabees this week
...-   Well, yes, that is true. But it is a Law; so I need to remove it. It is still only a little problem. I do not think that people will mind once they know.
-   (Question) I mind! And many people in the parish are talking about this.
-   Why haven’t they come to me and say something? Then I will need to give a sermon on “rash judgment”.
-   It is just a little problem.
-   (Question) No, Fr. Vassal, it is a very big problem!
-   Well you are the only one that spoke to me. Why did you come to me so late to speak of this?
-   (Answer) Because you have not been here often doing masses; nor, when you were here, you did not come out after mass as you usually do....

So, am I understanding this right, that a while ago, it was said that "a number of people have written letters to him [Fr. Vassal?] …still awaiting a response", and now Fr. Vassal says "Well you are the only one that spoke to me"? :confused1:

YES! I personally know of one person who wrote to Fr. Vassal; and received a reply from him.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #51 on:** February 27, 2013, 01:22:41 PM »

UPDATE: Post Falls has an outbreak of sodomy among the boys there.
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Sodomy-Scandal-in-Post-Falls-ID-SSPX-Immaculate-Conception-Academy

Now Fr. Vassal can perhaps see that when he attempts to introduce innovations
like deleting the Cross Bearer, he sows doubt among the Faithful, and when it
adds up enough, they'll invite their own bishop to come and give Confirmations.

I would suppose that +W used a Cross-Bearer in his procession! No?

Wessex · « **Reply #52 on:** February 27, 2013, 04:33:09 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Now Fr. Vassal can perhaps see that when he attempts to introduce innovations
like deleting the Cross Bearer, he sows doubt among the Faithful, and when it
adds up enough, they'll invite their own bishop to come and give Confirmations.

I believe that is what happened with the SSPX priest in Corsica. He was on the point of defecting but called in the diocesan bishop to confirm some of his flock who then left with him. If priests of the Society are taught that they must recognise diocesan bishops (a charge Fr. Pfeiffer makes when Bp. Fellay demands total obedience), perhaps it is not surprising when these same priests start to to use their services!

Machabees · « **Reply #53 on:** June 20, 2013, 10:53:53 PM »

I have just received two important news items from a friend regarding the removal of the Cross bearer from the Traditional Mass in Post Falls by the Prior Fr. Vassal, SSPX.

For those who remember this whole ordeal, this is the latest developments.

The first important development is one of “apparent” good news: Since Easter, the Cross bearer has been noticed to be put back into the parish bulletin as a “regular” inclusion. Whether this is by a “change of heart”, done under pressure from many people complaining, or from a “conversion”, I do not know. However, the Cross bearer just showed back up within the serving scheduled inside the parish bulletin.

To find out, my friend had called the head M.C. (again) to see what is going on with this. In brief, the head M.C. had said that: “Yes, it has been on the serving schedule lately. But it will now only be on feast days and holidays.” (That is extremely sad.) The question was posed back to him that, “Well, all Sunday’s are first class feast days, and therefore should have the Cross bearer ”. He did reply to say that, “The cross bearer is there like a ‘sacramental’. You bring it out to use it at times”. My friend surprised at this, mentioned, “The Cross bearer is more than a ‘sacramental’, it is the standard of the Faith; and should be there for every procession to proclaim that faith. So it should be on all Sundays and processions”. He replied to say, “Well thanks for the call. Not many people call with good things.” (?).

So what is the bottom line? Fr. Vassal has moved with a lot of liberal persuasion to even alter the “meaning” of our Holy Faith to get what he wants.

Life was good with the Cross bearer for the last several weeks over Eastertide.

What a disaster and a shame…for the SSPX to purposely sow the “anti-cross” mentality. What is next in Fr. Vassal’s agenda?

The second important point of news happens to involve the U.S. District Superior, Fr. Rostand, in all of this.

Below, is a series of 3-Letters addressed to Fr. Rostand, from one of the faithful that attends that Post Falls Chapel. He wrote in his letters the concerns of the Cross bearer being removed from the Post Falls liturgy, along with his conversation he had with Fr. Vassal about this. The 3-letters were mailed to Fr. Rostand since Feb. 27, 2013, April 2, 2013, and May 25, 2013. The importance of these letters, and why they are being revealed, is that Fr. Rostand, as the District Superior has NOT at all responded to any of his valid concerns.

Up to this date, since Feb. 27, 2013, 16-weeks have gone by without a response from Fr. Rostand. Nothing! Nada! Not a peep! Not a single show of responsibility from the U.S District Superior to address this scandal.

Is Fr. Rostand in conspiracy with Fr. Vassal of encouraging this betrayal of the Traditional Mass; to slowly “neuter” it like Vatican II had done? I do not know. However, he is certainly responsible for the actions that have taken place and his silence that contribute to this overall scandal.

Note: My friend had given me these letters to put on Cathinfo; not to show any kind of “disrespect”, to the contrary, he wants others to know what is going on within the chapel of Post Falls and in the SSPX U.S. District at large for others to “pay attention” in their chapels if this is going to be a “trend” of abuses; and to try and prevent any other abuses to happen within the Traditional Mass.

He also has said that if Fr. Rostand, as the District Superior, was responsible in his duties to respond to this scandal of the Cross bearer over these 16-weeks of trying to correspond to him, regardless of the outcome at this time, he would not have revealed these letters in the preference to try and take care of this with Fr. Rostand. It is ONLY because Fr. Rostand, the top Superior of the United States, has not responded, and is continuing to show he is irresponsible in his duties.

If scandals are happening at the highest levels, my friend believes that word needs to get out to stop these abuses to the Traditional Mass, and any other betrayals that may creep in.

Here are the letters:

=================================================

Feb. 27, 2013

Fr. Rostand
SSPX District Superior, USA
Regina Coeli House
11485 N. Farley Road
Platte City, MO 64079

Dear Fr. Rostand,

In result from a recent conversation I had with the Prior of Post Falls Idaho, Fr. Vassal, that with reflection, prayer, and time in passing, I am writing to you with a valid issue taking place here in the priory/parish of Post Falls. Namely, Fr. Vassal had removed on his own initiative, the Cross bearer from the Traditional Liturgy since Advent, December 2012.

I spoke to Fr. Vassal on Feb. 17, 2013, after a Sunday Mass, about his reasons for this; as Fr. Vassal had never announced it from the pulpit, nor informed us faithful in a newsletter, or even posted it in the vestibule. In addition he said, when I asked him if the District Superior knew of this, he said: “No.”

My concerns, outside of the obvious in changing the liturgy the way we have known it all of our lives, is that Fr. Vassal had done this removal privately, under the “radar”; which, as I mentioned to him, is the same thing that the Novus Ordo had done in changing the Liturgy after the Vatican II Council to promote their new religion.

Also, other than many people here that are talking about this, as well as many of the children and altar servers are confused, is that Fr. Vassal in my conversation with him is very nonchalant about this whole issue.

Below, I have written down the exchange of our conversation to bring out the context.

************************

In the exchange between us, Fr. Vassal responses follow:

•   I asked Fr. Vassal, Why did you remove the Cross bearer from the Mass, the Liturgy?

It is a Law of the Church; a Canon Law. The cross bearer in the rubrics is “only” for a Bishop. It is in my conscience that I need to remove the “abuse”. The “use” of the cross bearer in procession was actually started in France in revolt to the Bishop in France; from there it went everywhere.

•   Well, it is still in France today. It is still in Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet and other places.

Yes, but the priest over there does not want to do it. I do not think it is a problem. Many people may not understand. So we will have it on Holy Name Society Sunday; and some big feast days.

•   If it is “objective” as you say, and it is the Law, then why do you have it sometimes? Why not get rid of it altogether?

I would like to. But we can do it sometimes in procession.

•   Did you ask the District Superior about removing the Cross bearer?

No. (With a shrug of his shoulders, shaking his head, squinting his eyebrows). I don’t think that I need to. I do not see a problem. It is just a small thing. (Fr. Vassal held his fingers up with a very small gap between his fingers.)

•   Well isn’t that subjective to do it sometimes?

Well maybe. But it is just a small thing.

•   If it is “objective”, why isn’t it done in the rest of the District? It is not removed in the seminary?

I don’t know. (Shrug of shoulders.)

•   Isn’t it true in the Church, that if there is a Custom already established, not to remove it?

Well, yes, that is true. But it is a Law; so I need to remove it. It is still only a little problem. I do not think that people will mind once they know.

•   I mind! And many people in the parish are talking about this.

Why haven’t they come to me and say something? Then I will need to give a sermon on “rash judgment”. (It was Fr. Vassal that did not communicate this; and it was Fr. Vassal that caused the confusion; which caused in his view, people having a rash judgment!). It is just a little problem.

•   No, Fr. Vassal, it is a very big problem!

Well you are the only one that spoke to me. Why did you come to me so late to speak of this?

•   Because you have not been here often doing masses; nor, when you were here, you did not come out after mass as you usually do.

That is right. I have not been here, and after mass, much lately.

•   Fr. Vassal, you did not even announce it from the pulpit that you were going to remove the Cross bearer. You did not even write it in a newsletter. You did not say anything about it. You just did it. I know you are a foreigner in this country; but in this country when the Novus Ordo came out, the new church also made these changes little by little without telling anyone…and you are doing the same thing. So yes, it is a big problem!

Well maybe it was not prudent to do it without telling anyone. Maybe when I get back, I will think about it. But it is just a little thing. (Shrug of shoulders.) I do not think it is a problem.

•   Isn’t it important to teach people, and the children about the Cross, and the importance of it? There is a Boy’s school here. I know that many of the boys who serve are confused; and do not know what is going on. Isn’t the Crucifix the standard of our religion; of the Faith; of the Mass? Isn’t it the standard bearer, like in the earlier days where ever the standard bearer went, it was a message of communication? To get rid of the Cross bearer, the crucifix, is detrimental to the faith.

There is still a cross on the altar. I do not think it is a problem.

************************

The conversation went back and forth with each of us saying the same thing. Fr. Vassal kept looking at his watch; and said at many times that he is trying to find someone. He needs to go. Then he left.

As you can see Fr. Rostand, along with two weeks that had passed and the Cross Bearer is still removed, that Fr. Vassal intention is to continue on. I find this quite an abuse; especially since we are in a crisis of the faith in the Church today; and we are to uphold the tradition of our faith.

I have enclosed one of the Parish bulletins that also shows the Cross Bearer (CB) is removed from the serving schedule. In addition, I was told that Fr. Vassal removed the Cross Bearer from the Liturgy at the Carmelite Sisters in Spokane, as with the Dominican Sisters (the girl’s school) in Post Falls.

Can you please help me understand? Would it also be in your intention that the Cross Bearer be removed from the Traditional Liturgy?

I look forward to your correspondence in what your decision will be on this matter. Thank you.

In Jesu et Maria,

(Name.)
(Address.)

=================================================

April 2, 2013

Fr. Rostand
SSPX District Superior, USA
Regina Coeli House
11485 N. Farley Road
Platte City, MO 64079

Dear Fr. Rostand,

Happy Easter to you.

I have mailed to you a letter dated Feb. 27, 2013 in regards to Fr. Vassal, in Post Falls, changing the traditional liturgy in removing the Cross Bearer from the ceremonies; it is very confusing to all of us, especially in this crisis of the Church.

Since 5-weeks have past, I have not heard from you with a response. Can you please respond back to me of your intentions as the District Superior in this matter?

I will enclose the Feb. 27, 3013 Letter with this mailing.

Thank you.

God bless you,

(Name.)
(Address.)

=================================================

May 25, 2013

Fr. Rostand
SSPX District Superior, USA
Regina Coeli House
11485 N. Farley Road
Platte City, MO 64079

Dear Fr. Rostand,

I have mailed to you a letter dated Feb. 27, 2013 in regards to Fr. Vassal, in Post Falls, changing the traditional liturgy in removing the Cross Bearer from the ceremonies.

Since 5-weeks had passed in not hearing from you with a response, I had written a second letter to you dated April 2, 2013, over 7-weeks ago (totaling 12-weeks), and I still have not heard from you. I am baffled and concerned with your silence.

I am baffled because, as you are a “District Superior”, you have a responsibility before God to address this serious issue. One of your priests in this District has changed the Traditional Catholic Liturgy without your knowledge, nor consent. I am concerned because, as you are a “District Superior”, your silence in not responding to this, is thus acting to encourage it, and to endorse it. Is that what you would like us to believe from your silence on this serious matter?

I may be signing my name “singularly”; but there are many of us who are waiting for your response.

As the District Superior, can you please respond back to me of your intentions in this matter?

This is my third and last letter to you regarding this serious issue before I would have to go to the next level. I am hoping you will be faithful in your duties as a District Superior in that you will respectfully respond. I will enclose again the Feb. 27, 3013 Letter with this mailing.

Thank you.

God bless you,

(Name.)
(Address.)

=================================================

Still NO response! The scandal grows bigger...

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #54 on:** June 21, 2013, 12:05:46 AM »

.

Thank you Machabees for this information.

In a recent communique from Fr. Rostand (or maybe it was
one of his associates in the Society leadership), he
complains that the Faithful are doing wrong by making
private correspondence public. Let this be a lesson for him,
then, that if he does not want letters like this to be made
public, then perhaps he ought to ANSWER them instead of
ignoring them.

We could speculate as to why he hasn't answered them, but
all we need to realize is, that his reticence is the same kind
of thing EVERYONE gets from B. Fellay, who does not answer
mail that asks questions of him that he apparently does not
want to answer; because, if he did want to answer them
he would do so. But he does not.

And it is the superiors who form the subjects, so we can
expect the same of Fr. Rostand that we get from his S.G.

But it is a little encouraging to see that Fr. Vassal was at
least willing to meet with this layman who wrote the
letters, and to answer his questions honestly.

He does seem to contradict himself, though, saying that
it's "a little problem," but that he "had to do something."
If the 'problem' (what problem??) is so 'little' then why do
anything at all?

I would recommend a different approach, that of asking
him if he thinks that the cross is not a symbol of the
Faith, and what it is he thinks it does to people to see
the crucifix being carried in front of a procession. Ask
him if he believes that there is no crisis of faith going on
today, or whether he believes that carrying a crucifix
before a procession in some way harms the Faith of
Catholics.

Ask him if he is aware that non-Catholics criticize the
Church for displaying a cross with the corpus of Our Lord
on it, and many who call themselves "Christian" think
that the mere sight of a plain cross without any corpus is
most offensive for them to see. It might be interesting
to see what he thinks of that.

Tell him that in Los Angeles County a few years ago they
spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to REMOVE the
tiny cross from the County Seal officially. The California
Missions are a part of the state's history, and the Seal
used to show a small cross on top of the facade of a
Mission Church, but no more -- the church is still there
but the tiny cross has been removed, and it never came
up for any kind of vote. There was a brief public outcry
when it went into effect but that made no difference.

And tell him that in numerous cemeteries and public
places all across the country, crosses are being removed
at the expense of the taxpayer without their consent,
and it's not made public until it's too late -- and this can
easily be seen as one of the ERRORS OF RUSSIA that
was foretold in 1917!

Perhaps he does not mind having the Faithful wonder if
their pastor is more like those FALSE 'Christians' who find
the cross offensive, than he is like a real Catholic! Let
him think about that for a while.