Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: cosmas on May 26, 2019, 03:13:34 PM
-
A priest in St.Mary's said this morning, its no longer a Holy Day of Obligation. We'll have regular Sunday Services on that day but the Kansas City Diocese doesn't recognize it as a Holy Day of Obligation. I say who cares what the Diocese does . In the SSPX own Calendar it proclaims that it is A Holy Day of Obligation. So when are they going to tell everyone they have officially signed on with Rome. More and more indications are showing they are getting totally on board.--The sinking ship that is Rome.
-
Does it really matter as long as they have people such as yourself willing to stay aboard and sink right along with her?
-
A priest in St.Mary's said this morning, its no longer a Holy Day of Obligation. We'll have regular Sunday Services on that day but the Kansas City Diocese doesn't recognize it as a Holy Day of Obligation. I say who cares what the Diocese does . In the SSPX own Calendar it proclaims that it is A Holy Day of Obligation. So when are they going to tell everyone they have officially signed on with Rome. More and more indications are showing they are getting totally on board.--The sinking ship that is Rome.
So, you are saying that it was officially announced from the pulpit by the SSPX, at today's Sunday mass, that this coming Thursday, the Feast of the Ascencion is no longer a holy day of obligation?
-
How could any non sede say its a Holy Day of Obligation if the diocese says it isn't?
-
In the SSPX own Calendar it proclaims that it is A Holy Day of Obligation.
I looked at my SSPX calendar and it does not say it is a Holy Day of Obligation. I looked at my local chapel bulletin and it does not say it is a Holy Day of Obligation. So, the SSPX has once again snuck another one on us.
(P.S- I only go there because the priests are valid. )
-
How could any non sede say its a Holy Day of Obligation if the diocese says it isn't?
That's the difficulty with R&R. We try to abide by traditional ways but we really should know what is "extra" (traditional) and what is the truly required bottom line (current disciplines). I think it's important for a properly formed conscience. You don't want a bunch of people out there thinking they are under pain of mortal sin if they aren't. But I would hope the priests are still encouraging it to be treated seriously because it is an important day. It was a Holy Day when Catholics were sane and serious about their Faith. There is a reason for that. There is also a reason for our current laxer and laxer rules. We should be strongly encouraged to follow the traditional ways.
-
In the back of the SSPX calendar it does say its a Holy Day of Obligation.
-
In the back of the SSPX calendar it does say its a Holy Day of Obligation.
I wonder if it was printed before the change?
-
That's the difficulty with R&R. We try to abide by traditional ways but we really should know what is "extra" (traditional) and what is the truly required bottom line (current disciplines). I think it's important for a properly formed conscience. You don't want a bunch of people out there thinking they are under pain of mortal sin if they aren't. But I would hope the priests are still encouraging it to be treated seriously because it is an important day. It was a Holy Day when Catholics were sane and serious about their Faith. There is a reason for that. There is also a reason for our current laxer and laxer rules. We should be strongly encouraged to follow the traditional ways.
Right, OK, that seems more reasonable to me. "the Church isn't technically requiring this, but we still strongly recommend it." Same with the fasting rules.
-
The diocese of Kansas City accepts Vatican II (heresy) and is no longer Catholic.
If they say that Christmas is no longer a holy day of obligation, do we listen to them?
NO.
We don't care if they say water is wet. SSPX has supplied juristiction, and people go
to SSPX, because they don't want any part of heresy, such as the diocese of KC.
If SSPX in Saint Marys accepts the NEW rule that the Ascension is not a holy day,
then we want to know when SSPX signed an agreement with Rome to obey the local
diocesan bishop. It looks like Fellay has already done so and is keeping it a secret
as usual.
What's next? You don't have to go to Mass anymore, but we will provide the service,
anyway.
You don't have to go to confession anymore, but we will provide the service ?
-
How could any non sede say its a Holy Day of Obligation if the diocese says it isn't?
With all due respect sir,
sede argument is irrelevant. The Ordinary has jurisdiction. Like it or not, the diocese is his to command, not the Roman pontiff, not any council of bishops, and certainly not any calendar.
-
I don’t know about eddy stone. But the Feast of the Ascension has been moved to Sunday. It is Holy Day of Obligation.
-
My sspx no longer says ascension Thursday is a HDOO either. Nor do they say when traditional fast days are (ember days, lent etc), nor do they say you must receive communion once during the easter season, nor do they say you must fast for at least 3 hours before taking communion. They did all of these only 4 years ago, now they just forget tradition.
The sspx really isn't a traditional catholic organization anymore, they are a latin mass organization that accepts all the Novus ordo teachings. The only difference between the new SSPX and the FSSP or ICKSP is the sacraments are certain (unless you have a former Novus ordo priest at your church).
-
Ascension Thursday is a Holy Day of Obligation in the entirety of the following States: Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Nebraska. And 3 days before are Rogation days.
-
If you don’t believe the Conciliar hierarchy is the hierarchy of the Catholic Church (I.e. the Conciliar popes were not true Catholic popes) or even if you believe like Archbishop Lefebvre that it is possible that we may have to believe that these popes were not true popes then you are obligated under pain of mortal sin to observe Ascension Thursday as a holy day of obligation.
If on the other hand you have certainty that the Conciliar popes are true popes then not only do you not have to observe Ascension Thursday but you also don’t have to fast nor abstain from meat. And since everyone in the Conciliar Church goes to “heaven” you don’t have to keep the commandments either. You are free to do whatever you want. Most “Catholics” prefer it that way.
-
I looked at my SSPX calendar and it does not say it is a Holy Day of Obligation. I looked at my local chapel bulletin and it does not say it is a Holy Day of Obligation. So, the SSPX has once again snuck another one on us.
(P.S- I only go there because the priests are valid. )
The Priests are also valid at St. Joseph's Mission (SAJM/Dominicans) in Emmett, you are welcome to go there. We had Sunday Mass yesterday and the the past several Sundays.
-
The sspx really isn't a traditional catholic organization anymore, they are a latin mass organization that accepts all the Novus ordo teachings. The only difference between the new SSPX and the FSSP or ICKSP is the sacraments are certain (unless you have a former Novus ordo priest at your church).
Exactly my conclusion too.
-
The Priests are also valid at St. Joseph's Mission (SAJM/Dominicans) in Emmett, you are welcome to go there. We had Sunday Mass yesterday and the the past several Sundays.
Thanks for the invitation but my SSPX chapel is many states away from Kansas. How many priest do they have at St. Joseph's Mission and who ordained them? Do they have a seminary attached to the resistance bishops?
-
error
-
Thanks for the invitation but my SSPX chapel is many states away from Kansas. How many priest do they have at St. Joseph's Mission and who ordained them? Do they have a seminary attached to the resistance bishops?
My mistake, I though I was replying to "cosmas".
As for your questions, they currently have two priests (they reside at the priory in Connecticut but travel to KS regularly). one is Bishop Zendejas, he is the prior and the other priests is Fr. Reginald. Yes, the seminary is the Society of Apostles of Jesus and Mary (located in France) started by Bishop Faure, so yes they are indeed attached to the Resistance Bishops!!!
I know Fr. Faure was ordained by Archbishop Lefevbre, and I believe Fr. Zendajs also, as for Fr. Reginald, that would have been one of the 4 SSPX Bishops as he was ordained around 2012.
-
One of our first Ascension of our Lord feasts was on a Thursday night at St Jude’s Eddystone. It was impressive. The whole church was packed. People were standing. I have never seen anything like it.
-
A priest in St.Mary's said this morning, its no longer a Holy Day of Obligation. We'll have regular Sunday Services on that day but the Kansas City Diocese doesn't recognize it as a Holy Day of Obligation. I say who cares what the Diocese does . In the SSPX own Calendar it proclaims that it is A Holy Day of Obligation. So when are they going to tell everyone they have officially signed on with Rome. More and more indications are showing they are getting totally on board.--The sinking ship that is Rome.
Cosmas can you name the priest and which Mass you attended. I have many friends in St. Marys and I would like to ask them if they heard it as well. They may have went to a different Mass.
This is nothing surprising if it is true. The watering down has been going on in the SSPX for so long now. What is next, a Saturday evening Mass? Those who still go there do not want to open their eyes or ears or even their mouths because If I were there I would be asking the priest what was going on. They have been brainwashed to follow blindly, it is like a cult now.
-
Here is a link that shows when this Canon 1246 came into effect. http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/canon-law/complementary-norms/canon-1246.cfm
Most Traditional are aware that the New Codes are basically Vatican II on wheels. Most Trads know that following VII and the New Codes will lead to loss of one's faith and therefore must not be followed.
Most Traditional know that Archbishop Levebre was very much against the new code. Here are some of his quotes...
Each one of these notions is ambiguous and will allow Protestant and Modernist errors to inspire from now on the legislation of the Church. It is the authority of the Pope and of the Bishops which is going to suffer; the distinction between the clergy and the laity will also diminish; the absolute and necessary character of the Catholic will also be extenuated to the profit of heresy and schism; and the fundamental realities of sin and grace will be worn down. These are all dangerous for the doctrine of the Church and the salvation of souls.” (Ibid.)
Since most of us can remember, the SSPX always followed the Old rules and now in 2019 they are allegedly saying that we can follow the new rules and move Ascension Thursday to Sunday? This must be coming from the new training in the seminaries! The senior members of the SSPX which are still there are at least tolerating this blatant new conciliar direction because being ostracized and possibly thrown out is too much for them to handle. I wonder if even one faithful is questioning the priest about such things?
-
I heard that it was Fr. Carlyle at the 7:15 am Mass.
-
Someone asked me to post this (relevant portion begins at about 1:30) ...
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFINZXWxzTU&t=5434s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFINZXWxzTU&t=5434s)
-
UNBELIEVABlE!!!! HOW SAD!!!!!!
-
I don't understand the uproar.
If the V2 Hierarchy are legitimate, then they are perfectly within their rights to lift the obligation here. Is it good or ideal? Certainly not. But can any of you who consider the Novus Ordo hierarchy to be legitimate take it upon yourselves to tell people that they commit mortal sin if they don't attend Mass on Thursday? Who's binding consciences now under pain of sin? Only legitimate Church authority can do that.
Even if you hold the V2 Hierarchy to be "doubtful", then the obligation is doubtful, and doubtful obligations cannot bind under pain of sin. I see the SSPX as being merely consistent.
Please help me to understand how this is incorrect reasoning.
-
I don't understand the uproar.
If the V2 Hierarchy are legitimate, then they are perfectly within their rights to lift the obligation here. Is it good or ideal? Certainly not. But can any of you who consider the Novus Ordo hierarchy to be legitimate take it upon yourselves to tell people that they commit mortal sin if they don't attend Mass on Thursday? Who's binding consciences now under pain of sin? Only legitimate Church authority can do that.
Even if you hold the V2 Hierarchy to be "doubtful", then the obligation is doubtful, and doubtful obligations cannot bind under pain of sin. I see the SSPX as being merely consistent.
Please help me to understand how this is incorrect reasoning.
Unfortunately, this is exactly correct.
Still, it might have been nice to hear why moving the feast to Sunday is scandalous (and theologically erroneous). But that isn’t going to happen in the ralliement era (especially not at that chapel, with its band leader, it’s roller coaster riding priest, and the old “mortal sin to refuse a deal with Rome” sermons, etc.).
-
This change occurred "officially" since 1991. The loaded question is to "WHY" now mention it? Why haven't they been announcing it for 28 years? What is different this year than last year. Did the Superiors not know that these things could be legitimately changed until this year? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the SSPX are now one of the factions in the Conciliar Church like all the other Dei Ecclesia Members? This is part of the slow reconciliation?
-
I meant Ecclesia Dei. ^
-
There is no mention of the change in the bulletin and the Thursday schedule is that of Holy Day (same as Sunday): https://smac.edu/sites/sspx/files/media/bulletin_05_26_2019.pdf
-
JMJ2cents, it was Fr. Carlyle that announced it off the pulpit , I believe at all the Masses .
-
The pastor of Assumption Church in Walton, KY, Father Muscha, announced last year that Ascension Thursday is no longer a holyday of obligation, BUT he said the day would still be celebrated with the same solemnity as always.
-
I remembered this subject being discussed last year here in Cath Info. It was titled: "Is the obligation to attend Mass on Ascension Thursday binding according to SSPX?" dated May 11, 2018. it appears on either page 28 or 29. It contains interesting comments, but unfortunately it went some other direction. It was started after Father Thomas Asher, SSPX wrote about the subject. For anyone who would like to review what was said back then...
-
I remembered this subject being discussed last year here in Cath Info. It was titled: "Is the obligation to attend Mass on Ascension Thursday binding according to SSPX?" dated May 11, 2018. it appears on either page 28 or 29. It contains interesting comments, but unfortunately it went some other direction. It was started after Father Thomas Asher, SSPX wrote about the subject. For anyone who would like to review what was said back then...
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/is-the-obligation-to-attend-mass-on-ascension-thursday-binding-according-to-sspx/
The Ascension is still a Holyday of obligation on Thursday in the Ukrainian Catholic church. The Eastern Churches can transfer holy days to a Sunday, but to the best of my knowledge, even the Maronites have Ascension as a holyday of obligation on Thursday, and they are the most likely to follow modern Roman practice.
-
ASCENSION OF THE LORD, Holyday of Obligation: Wed., May 29, 7:30 PM Anticipated Mass; Thurs., May 30, 8:00 AM Mass and 7:30 PM Mass
Mater Ecclesiae Berlin,
New Jersey.
-
Mater Ecclesiae Berlin, New Jersey.
That's consistent with the modern western church. In about ten US states - including New Jersey - Thursday is the holyday and it hasn't been moved to Sunday.
-
The current 2019 SSPX calendar lists Holy Days of Obligation as:
All Sundays - The Octave of the Nativity, The Ascension, The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, The Feast of All Saints, The Immaculate Conception, and Christmas Day.
This Thursday, The Ascension, the mass schedule is the same as it's been on all previous Ascension Thursday's, the same as a Sunday with all 6 masses scheduled. On the school calendar it is noted, "Thursday, May 30th: Ascension Thursday Holy Day of Obligation - NO Classes."
Yes, the SSPX priests consider Ascension Thursday a holy day of obligation and is to be celebrated on Thursday and they do expect everybody to attend mass on Thursday despite what the local district in Kansas says.
-
The current 2019 SSPX calendar lists Holy Days of Obligation as:
All Sundays - The Octave of the Nativity, The Ascension, The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, The Feast of All Saints, The Immaculate Conception, and Christmas Day.
This Thursday, The Ascension, the mass schedule is the same as it's been on all previous Ascension Thursday's, the same as a Sunday with all 6 masses scheduled. On the school calendar it is noted, "Thursday, May 30th: Ascension Thursday Holy Day of Obligation - NO Classes."
Yes, the SSPX priests consider Ascension Thursday a holy day of obligation and is to be celebrated on Thursday and they do expect everybody to attend mass on Thursday despite what the local district in Kansas says.
Did you hear that from an SSPX priests or are you making that assumption? Does he then admit Fr. Carlyle was wrong to have made the announcement?
For clarification, when you say "local district in Kansas", do you mean to say "the U.S. SSPX District in Platte City, MO" or did you mean to say "the archdioceses of Kansas City"?
-
The Archdioceses, not the SSPX in Plate City.
-
Platte City, sorry spelling error.
-
I always find this type of conversation fascinating since the US is still mostly mission territory and the idea of abrogation of Holy Days in the US was ALWAYS on the table traditionally at every meeting of bishops from the first council of Baltimore. If the bishops do this thing which was asked for by most bishops almost always in this ecclesiastical area, what makes the decision problematic?
The SSPX has been non servicing chapels on Holy Days for years.
-
The Dioceses of New York and Brooklyn (all of NYC), have transferred Ascension Day to the following Sat. vigil or Sunday. The "diocese" of the NYC Parking Authority faithfully adheres to Church tradition and honors Our Lord by cancelling Alternate Side Parking on Ascension Thursday. Because Catholics won't offer Him due worship, He has raised up the lowly and despised distributor of fines, tickets, boots, and tows to the impound lot.
Since the Church in NY denied me the opportunity to hear the true Mass, I took advantage, with thanks to God, of parking directly in front of my residence.
-
I always find this type of conversation fascinating since the US is still mostly mission territory and the idea of abrogation of Holy Days in the US was ALWAYS on the table traditionally at every meeting of bishops from the first council of Baltimore.
I have never heard of this before, nor do I believe any of it, what is your source?
-
Get a copy of Cathedrals in the wilderness the biography of Bishop Flaget or any other book of history of the church in the US
-
The [Archdiocese] of New York and [the Diocese of] Brooklyn (all of NYC) have transferred Ascension Day to the following Sat. vigil or Sunday.
This is dead wrong. Last Thursday, May 30, there were Novus Ordo holyday masses—attendance at one of which was characterized by the chancery office as binding under pain of mortal sin—at every one of the twenty or so parishes within a ten-mile radius of my home. In addition, of course, the few local Trad chapels and all the indult locations had TLMs on their schedules.
In short, whether one is a real Catholic or a conciliarist, Ascension Thursday is still a holyday of obligation in New York City and State. Moreover, it should hardly require explanation that the city's Department of Transportation—as Jew-controlled and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ-infested as every other city agency—is not in the business of granting parking exemptions solely or primarily to benefit Traditionalist Catholics.
Seraphina needs to explain whether she wrote what she did in ignorance or in malice.
-
Seraphina needs to explain whether she wrote what she did in ignorance or in malice.
Oh, give it a rest. If her information was not correct, then it was certainly the former.
-
Oh, give it a rest. If her information was not correct, then it was certainly the former.
It is incorrect. Here is the schedule at St Patrick's Cathedral in New York:
https://www.saintpatrickscathedral.org/calendar (https://www.saintpatrickscathedral.org/calendar)
-
Oh, give it a rest. …
This is priceless coming from a guy with more than 17,000 posted comments. Hot air, anyone?
-
This is priceless coming from a guy with more than 17,000 posted comments. Hot air, anyone?
I was talking about this post in particular, where you suggest that someone could have been malicious in simply having bad information.