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

Author Topic: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that  (Read 1756 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 31183
  • Reputation: +27099/-494
  • Gender: Male
Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
« on: May 14, 2021, 02:32:36 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Who says the SSPX hasn't changed! You need to have your brain examined.

    Talking about the diocese and archdiocese all the time (of the Conciliar Church! Hello?) and going by POST-VATICAN II practices -- what's next? The Novus Ordo Mass? That is technically approved by the Conciliar Church too, you realize?

    Traditional Catholics don't keep 2 eyes glued on the (Conciliar) diocese. We "let the dead bury their dead". When the Conciliar Church is ready to convert back to the Catholic Faith, we'll know. It won't be subtle, and it won't be a secret. It will probably only happen post-Chastisement.

    Aren't we supposed to be TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS -- by definition, that means trashing everything after Vatican II to save our Faith, and holding to what is known, what is true, what is a "known good" to maintain our Faith intact during this Crisis in the Church?

    Hasn't the SSPX defected from Tradition BY DEFINITION by doing things like this?

    Seriously.

    When you start cherry picking "Well, the Church is the Church, they have the Keys to loose and to bind..." where does it end?

    The "official Church" changed the Mass, too, in 1969. You gonna go along with that change too?

    I was raised Traditional Catholic, which is a package deal. Basically you ignore the counterfeit Conciliar Church and cling to the WHOLE PACKAGE of Catholicism as it was before Vatican II. Priests trained in the Traditional way, ordained in the Old Rite, by bishops consecrated in the Old Rite, the Mass 100% Tridentine, using no books or Liturgy that wasn't set in 1962 or earlier, all religious practices (Rosary, etc.) only used if they were from before Vatican II -- no Luminous Mysteries, no "Divine Mercy" devotion, etc.

    Traditional version of the Bible, only traditional songs and chant, traditional attire at Mass, traditional art, traditional church design, traditional Catechisms used, traditional calendar, traditional saints  -- you get the idea.

    Holy Days, feast days, fast days -- all Traditional Catholics act as if it's still 1962 or earlier. What am I missing here? Hasn't the SSPX clearly defected when they continually surrender to the Conciliar Church like this?
    Logged
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Minnesota

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1804
    • Reputation: +943/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #1 on: May 14, 2021, 03:03:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • At the St. Cloud chapel, it was made clear as day that it was a Holy Day of Obligation.

    Any other Society chapels that still followed the Catholic calendar yesterday?
    Logged
    Christ is Risen! He is risen indeed

    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3849/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #2 on: May 14, 2021, 03:06:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • This is like the calendars where they give the little fishes that mean "traditional day of fast and abstinence" but acknowledge that the Novus Ordo Bishops have the right to remove the obligation, but suggesting that we still follow the old rules anyway. Or acknowledging that the Communion fast is now one hour. Is it true that in the SSPX seminaries they served breakfast before Mass on Sundays and Holy Days so that one could not follow the older Communion fast from midnight (A former seminarian in Argentina said this)? It is a sign that they believe the Novus Ordo Bishops have power even though they often misuse it.
    Logged
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1889
    • Reputation: +500/-141
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #3 on: May 14, 2021, 10:10:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I think being able to say a day *isn't* a holy day of obligation is a bit different than the NO, because the argument against NO is that its against divine law, or at least, that its harmful to the faith, and thus we can't comply with it.  By analogy, SSPX (and other recognize and resisters) are engaging in civil disobedience.

    If somehow the Novus Ordo bishop was to say we aren't allowed to worship on Ascension Thursday (or any other historic day of worship) I could see being like, yeah, we're not going to obey that.

    But if Holy Days of Obligation are a part of ecclesial law, rather than divine law, than presumably the ecclesial authority can technically change them, even if the ecclesial authority sucks.  By contrast, if the sees are vacant (as Sedevacantists have it) than of course a non-authority can't change any holy days of obligation.  And not even a valid authority could change divine law.  Is "Ascension Day is a Holy Day of obligation" part of *divine* law?

    Perhaps I'm missing something here, and maybe the SSPX doesn't need to announce this, but I feel like saying "yeah, Francis is the Pope, and yeah, the diocesan bishop is the bishop of this place, they say you don't have to go to mass today, but I'm saying no, you are obliged to on pain of eternal damnation unless you repent before you die" seems like effectively appropriating episcopal authority to oneself, and I don't see how that can be justified under R and R principles.

    What am I missing here?
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #4 on: May 14, 2021, 10:13:35 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 14, 2021, 10:10:21 PM
    I think being able to say a day *isn't* a holy day of obligation is a bit different than the NO, because the argument against NO is that its against divine law, or at least, that its harmful to the faith, and thus we can't comply with it.  By analogy, SSPX (and other recognize and resisters) are engaging in civil disobedience.

    If somehow the Novus Ordo bishop was to say we aren't allowed to worship on Ascension Thursday (or any other historic day of worship) I could see being like, yeah, we're not going to obey that.

    But if Holy Days of Obligation are a part of ecclesial law, rather than divine law, than presumably the ecclesial authority can technically change them, even if the ecclesial authority sucks.  By contrast, if the sees are vacant (as Sedevacantists have it) than of course a non-authority can't change any holy days of obligation.  And not even a valid authority could change divine law.  Is "Ascension Day is a Holy Day of obligation" part of *divine* law?

    Perhaps I'm missing something here, and maybe the SSPX doesn't need to announce this, but I feel like saying "yeah, Francis is the Pope, and yeah, the diocesan bishop is the bishop of this place, they say you don't have to go to mass today, but I'm saying no, you are obliged to on pain of eternal damnation unless you repent before you die" seems like effectively appropriating episcopal authority to oneself, and I don't see how that can be justified under R and R principles.

    What am I missing here?
    Nothing.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1889
    • Reputation: +500/-141
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #5 on: May 14, 2021, 10:16:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Matto on May 14, 2021, 03:06:10 PM
    This is like the calendars where they give the little fishes that mean "traditional day of fast and abstinence" but acknowledge that the Novus Ordo Bishops have the right to remove the obligation, but suggesting that we still follow the old rules anyway. Or acknowledging that the Communion fast is now one hour. Is it true that in the SSPX seminaries they served breakfast before Mass on Sundays and Holy Days so that one could not follow the older Communion fast from midnight (A former seminarian in Argentina said this)? It is a sign that they believe the Novus Ordo Bishops have power even though they often misuse it.
    I once had an argument with an R and R friend about this.  Objecting to this (not the serving breakfast before mass thing, that seems ridiculous and probably false) seems ridiculous to me.  Fasting rules have obviously changed in the Church before V2, they even differ based on rite, so I don't see how it can be part of divine law.... which means the bishop has the right to change it... unless you're sedevacantist and you don't really believe that bishop has authority over you, in that case, sure, a non authority can't change the rules.

    Now of course, any Traditional Catholic is going to say you'd be better serving your soul by following the older rules, in all things whether fasting or fasting for communion or holy days or whatever, but the idea that you can say "yeah, he's the bishop, yeah, this isn't an issue of divine law but human law, yeah he changed the rule, but no, I'm still going to say you're committing a mortal sin if you follow the new rule and will be damned unless you repent before you die" seems ridiculous to me.  It seems like either the current SSPX position (that only the Church can bind to a specific act of penance, but that following the current rules consistently leads to a danger that one will be neglectful of penance in general which violates divine law) or the full blown Sedevacantist position is more consistent.  I don't understand the middle ground of "yeah he's the Pope and the bishop but that means absolutely nothing, even when it comes to mere ecclesiastical law." 

    And before someone mentions the NO, I think there's really only three consistent positions there either; either you're disobeying it because you're a Sedevacantist and think there was no real authority that promulgated it, you think its positively harmful to the faith and contra divine law (the first one and the second one can go together, or one can go without the other), or you don't accept either of those arguments and thus you submit to it because it came from legit authority and isn't contra to divine law.  I don't understand this other thing.
    Logged

    Offline Viva Cristo Rey

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16449
    • Reputation: +4863/-1803
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #6 on: May 15, 2021, 05:33:51 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Masonic nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr moves the Holy Day to Sunday.  

    They can celebrate Ramadan.....
    Logged
    May God bless you and keep you

    Offline JuanM

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 1
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #7 on: May 15, 2021, 05:50:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 14, 2021, 10:10:21 PM
    I think being able to say a day *isn't* a holy day of obligation is a bit different than the NO, because the argument against NO is that its against divine law, or at least, that its harmful to the faith, and thus we can't comply with it.  By analogy, SSPX (and other recognize and resisters) are engaging in civil disobedience.

    If somehow the Novus Ordo bishop was to say we aren't allowed to worship on Ascension Thursday (or any other historic day of worship) I could see being like, yeah, we're not going to obey that.

    But if Holy Days of Obligation are a part of ecclesial law, rather than divine law, than presumably the ecclesial authority can technically change them, even if the ecclesial authority sucks.  By contrast, if the sees are vacant (as Sedevacantists have it) than of course a non-authority can't change any holy days of obligation.  And not even a valid authority could change divine law.  Is "Ascension Day is a Holy Day of obligation" part of *divine* law?

    Perhaps I'm missing something here, and maybe the SSPX doesn't need to announce this, but I feel like saying "yeah, Francis is the Pope, and yeah, the diocesan bishop is the bishop of this place, they say you don't have to go to mass today, but I'm saying no, you are obliged to on pain of eternal damnation unless you repent before you die" seems like effectively appropriating episcopal authority to oneself, and I don't see how that can be justified under R and R principles.

    What am I missing here?

    Exactly. On the other hand Matthew - a layman - gets to decide who can and who cannot attend Mass at St. Dominic’s.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #8 on: May 15, 2021, 05:52:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 14, 2021, 10:16:41 PM
    I once had an argument with an R and R friend about this.  Objecting to this (not the serving breakfast before mass thing, that seems ridiculous and probably false) seems ridiculous to me.  Fasting rules have obviously changed in the Church before V2, they even differ based on rite, so I don't see how it can be part of divine law.... which means the bishop has the right to change it... unless you're sedevacantist and you don't really believe that bishop has authority over you, in that case, sure, a non authority can't change the rules.

    Now of course, any Traditional Catholic is going to say you'd be better serving your soul by following the older rules, in all things whether fasting or fasting for communion or holy days or whatever, but the idea that you can say "yeah, he's the bishop, yeah, this isn't an issue of divine law but human law, yeah he changed the rule, but no, I'm still going to say you're committing a mortal sin if you follow the new rule and will be damned unless you repent before you die" seems ridiculous to me.  It seems like either the current SSPX position (that only the Church can bind to a specific act of penance, but that following the current rules consistently leads to a danger that one will be neglectful of penance in general which violates divine law) or the full blown Sedevacantist position is more consistent.  I don't understand the middle ground of "yeah he's the Pope and the bishop but that means absolutely nothing, even when it comes to mere ecclesiastical law."

    And before someone mentions the NO, I think there's really only three consistent positions there either; either you're disobeying it because you're a Sedevacantist and think there was no real authority that promulgated it, you think its positively harmful to the faith and contra divine law (the first one and the second one can go together, or one can go without the other), or you don't accept either of those arguments and thus you submit to it because it came from legit authority and isn't contra to divine law.  I don't understand this other thing.

    There is a middle case, which is more difficult to ascertain:

    A law which runs contrary to the common good is no law at all.

    So, since the case of many of the disciplinary changes since Vatican II do seem to run contrary to the common good (eg., 1 hour “fast;” etc.), are they in fact “law” at all?
    And if they are not true laws, then the “old” laws would remain in place.

    This would be an argument in favor of the old laws remaining obligatory (at least for those conscious of the evil in the new norms).

    The SSPX has even acknowledged in one of its articles of a few years ago that the new norms governing fast and abstinence are not sufficient for obtaining salvation (ie., run contrary to the common good).

    Confusingly, however, they do not say these new laws are not laws at all, but rather encourage the faithful to observe the traditional norms (while not saying they are obligatory).

    In the end, I’m not sure what the answer is, but it sure seems safer to disregard the new norms and stick with the old, regardless of whether they remain obligatory or not.

    Therefore, I accidentally eat something 2.5 hours before Mass, I do not receive communion.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10059
    • Reputation: +5253/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #9 on: May 15, 2021, 05:54:23 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: JuanM on May 15, 2021, 05:50:47 AM
    Exactly. On the other hand Matthew - a layman - gets to decide who can and who cannot attend Mass at St. Dominic’s.
    You're not doing yourself any favors if you're hoping to get your other post answered and not deleted.
    Logged
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #10 on: May 15, 2021, 05:57:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Minnesota on May 14, 2021, 03:03:38 PM
    At the St. Cloud chapel, it was made clear as day that it was a Holy Day of Obligation.

    Any other Society chapels that still followed the Catholic calendar yesterday?
    Same for Michigan, Fr. said from the pulpit on Sunday that it was a Holy Day of Obligation.
    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 Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31183
    • Reputation: +27099/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #11 on: May 15, 2021, 07:21:39 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: JuanM on May 15, 2021, 05:50:47 AM
    Exactly. On the other hand Matthew - a layman - gets to decide who can and who cannot attend Mass at St. Dominic’s.

    Who have I banned from the chapel? No one thus far. I am not in charge of the chapel; Bp. Zendejas is.

    I just keep the place clean, make sure everything is in order for Mass, answer the phones, etc. I am the coordinator, nothing more.

    Once again, truth is not on the side of the neo-SSPX. This neo-SSPX shill is, once again, full of crap up to his neck.
    Logged
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31183
    • Reputation: +27099/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #12 on: May 15, 2021, 08:48:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Another point I'd like to address to The Shill --

    You can call me dim-witted all you want, but apparently I have enough wits to set up and maintain a Traditional Catholic forum for 15 years, overcoming hundreds of obstacles (both human and technical) over the years. And at present, I've managed to curate quite a group of Traditional Catholics here on CathInfo.

    CathInfo is either the biggest or one of the biggest Trad Catholic forums, to the point that shills like you can't seem to ignore it, for purposes of Public Relations, controlling the narrative, spewing propaganda, influencing public opinion, destroying your enemies' reputations, etc. Your repeated actions to sneak back in after being banned prove that you "want in", and that CathInfo has a high value.

    Why are all your dead accounts, Shill, on the bottom of my shoe, and not vice-versa? I didn't inherit CathInfo from my daddy. Nor did I buy CathInfo or win it in a lottery. I put together, and grew from nothing, something that YOU want desperately. Not bad for someone dim of wit.
    Logged
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Mr G

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2128
    • Reputation: +1326/-87
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #13 on: May 15, 2021, 11:26:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on May 15, 2021, 05:57:32 AM
    Same for Michigan, Fr. said from the pulpit on Sunday that it was a Holy Day of Obligation.
    In Michigan, dose the local bishop NOT consider it a Holy Day and thus your SSPX priests is going against the Diocese, or dose the bishop still has it as a Holy Day for his Diocese and thus the SSPX priests gives the impression he is resisting the local bishop when he is not?


    In Kansas the SSPX goes along with the local bishop:
    https://smac.edu/sites/sspx/files/media/bulletin_05_09_2021.pdf
    "Thursday May 13 is the Ascension of Our Lord. The Sunday Mass schedule will be followed. Ascension Thursday is not a holy day of obligation for most dioceses in the U.S. (including the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas); however, we encourage everyone to sanctify the day"
    Logged

    Offline BarbaraZ

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 45
    • Reputation: +45/-3
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Neo-SSPX - Diocese this, Ascension isn't a Holy Day that
    « Reply #14 on: May 15, 2021, 05:16:57 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • 2018....Fr. Muscha , pastor of Assumption Church. Walton  , KY, declared from the pulpit....Ascension Thursday is not a holyday of obligation. 
    This past Ascension Thursday one of the priests, not the pastor,  reminded the faithful after his Mass that " it is a holyday of obligation today. Do not leave church and go back to chores, but spend the day with God."
    Who's on 1st ? 
    Logged
    Pages: [1] 2
    « previous next »