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

Author Topic: Is the obligation to attend Mass on Ascension Thursday binding according to SSPX  (Read 16366 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
If you are not a sedevacantist, then it is perfectly within the power of the Pope and Bishops (with his permission) to eliminate or move days of obligation.  He's only being consistent.  Whether you like it or not, this is just fact.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
If you are not a sedevacantist, then it is perfectly within the power of the Pope and Bishops (with his permission) to eliminate or move days of obligation.  He's only being consistent.  Whether you like it or not, this is just fact.

Being sedevacantist (or not) is a different matter.

Once you look at everything through the lens of "well, this is the Church, and they have the power of the keys..." the whole Traditional Movement collapses. The whole "resist" portion of "recognize and resist" collapses. 

Tradition has always been about "pretending that Vatican II was just a bad dream" and crafting lifeboats, makeshift churches, in which we stick to the ENTIRE PACKAGE of what used to be Catholicism: all the old standards of morality, disciplines, liturgy, and spiritual practices. Heck, we still use the 1962 calendar (or earlier) as well as an outdated (1962 or earlier) Missale. We area also decades behind in terms of priestly formation (no TV, no modern philosophers, teaching Theology in Latin, no psychology course, no Freud, no sensitivity training, teaching seminarians animosity towards the Modern World, etc.)

Where does this neo-SSPX line of reasoning end? They're starting from "recognize" and pretty soon there won't be any "resist" left, because the official Church, with the power of the Keys has instituted the New Mass, etc. so how can they oppose it any longer? Where do they draw the line and say, "We are Trad, we aren't going there." Today it's 2 miles away, tomorrow it's 1 mile away, and next year it will be just 100 feet away. Before long they'll be OK with the Novus Ordo Mass, merely "preferring" the Latin Mass (which is what they will soon start to call the Tridentine Mass).

It's a bunch of crap. The whole argument: namely, just because we fail to depose the Pope (or declare him deposed) we must go along with the destructive insanity.

Traditional Catholics have not acted this way up till now.


You are missing the point entirely. We "resist" by going to mass on the Thursday anyway. Doesn't change the fact that we don't have an obligation to under conscience.

We "resist" by going to mass on the Thursday anyway. Doesn't change the fact that we don't have an obligation to under conscience.
You speak for yourself. I see it differently. We DO have an obligation under conscience, and to me, the fact that the USCCB changed the law is just further proof that they are part of a counterfeit church leading souls to Hell. "By their deeds you shall know them". The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962


I'm confused.  I thought the SSPX/R&R has always considered the 1983 Canon Law legit.  Wouldn't the new liturgical calendar/days of holy obligation be in the same category?
True traditional Catholics draw a line in the sand and follow the 1917 code of canon law, for everything after Vatican 2 is questionable.

According to Can. 1246 §1 The Lord’s Day, on which the paschal mystery is celebrated, is by apostolic tradition to be observed in the universal Church as the primary holyday of obligation. In the same way the following holydays are to be observed: the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the
Epiphany, the Ascension of Christ, the feast of the Body and Blood of Christ, the feast of Mary the Mother of God, her Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, the feast of St Joseph, the feast of the Apostles SS Peter and Paul, and the feast of All Saints.
§2 However, the Episcopal Conference may, with the prior approval of the Apostolic See,
suppress certain holydays of obligation or transfer them to a Sunday.


So unless an Episcopal conference was held with the approval of the pope, wherein ALL the bishops in the USA got together and agreed to transfer Ascension Thursday to the following sunday, it isn't legit.

The SSPX is telling us, that since the time of its founding, the good ABL had an oversight of something so profound?  I might be stupid, but ABL wasn't.