CathInfo.com

It's not just the SSPX.  I've noticed on two different chapel bulletins for
Quinquagesima Sunday this year the laws for fasting and abstinence during
Lent were missing or full of errors.  My gut feeling is there is some kind of
demonic oppression going on this year whereby priests of all stripes are
forgetting to mention the rules we need to hear.  

There are a lot of controversies going on, not the least of which is the Pope
abdicating, probably due to the pederasty scandal threatening to overrun
the Vatican (according to +W at the confirmation sermon in P.F.ID yesterday),
and the ultimatum from Di Noia to +Fellay to answer the letter or watch his
priests getting personal offers.  

These pressures seem to have obscured the normal focus on Lenten practices.
Even the excellent sermon on Lent that Fr. Pfeiffer gave on Ash Wednesday
did not contain the clear and specific rules of what we are expected to do
for fasting and abstinence.  I'm sure it was an oversight.  But that's what I'm
talking about.

Msgr. Perez explained this a few months ago in catechism class, something that
has been "swept under the rug" ever since Vatican II, and that is, that the
WEEKLY abstinence on Friday THROUGHOUT THE YEAR has not been abrogated.
All Pope Paul VI did was to introduce one of the pernicious 'options' that are
so endemic in the NovusOrdo, and this one is that you still have the obligation,
under pain of mortal sin, to do some kind of penitential practice on every
Friday of the year.  But how often do you hear it explained that way?  The
simple thing to do is just don't eat flesh meat on Friday.  Because if you choose
the option of replacing that with some other penance, it MUST be a penance
that is AT LEAST as difficult as not eating flesh meat.  

So the jig is up, basically.  Anyone who thinks they are 'off the hook' and can be
like a Protestant and eat BBQ tri tip and marinated chicken with all the company
picnickers on Friday without so much as a scruple of conscience is only fooling
himself.  For if it would be a REALLY CHALLENGING THING to abstain from meat
on that particular Friday, then the substitute penance that is REQUIRED is one
that would be REALLY CHALLENGING to do.  So to say that "I'll just smile at
everyone I meet today, for my penance," how does that qualify as "really
challenging?"  Now, smiling, stopping, kneeling down, and bowing before them
might be really challenging, but who is going to do that?  

Or, "I'll just help an old lady across the street" -- uh, is that 'really challenging?'
Try, staying there for an hour and helping everyone who comes along across the
street, and do it in the morning, instead of a lunch break and in the afternoon,
for a total of 3 hours.  Now THAT would qualify as 'really challenging.'  But who
is going to do that?  Oh, if you are already a volunteer crossing guard, it doesn't
count because you were going to do it anyway.  

We don't know how good we have it.  All we are required to do is abstain from
meat on every Friday of the year - INCLUDING Fridays of Lent (and Ash
Wednesday), and we would be in the habit every week to do the right thing.  
Then it isn't so hard, SO LONG AS IT IS A REGULAR HABIT.  What makes it
DIFFICULT is when we STOP making it a regular habit!


So you see, while people are under the false
impression that Paul VI made things easier,
in fact, he made things more difficult.  


He bemoaned that "the smoke of satan has entered the Church" but he's the
one who lit the fire!  He made penance more difficult while the smoke of satan
obscures the fact while Catholics buy into the Big Lie.

Now, it's Vat.IIB, and Society priests are soft-pedaling the Lenten abstinence
rules.  The devil never sleeps.  Several local NovusOrdo parishes here have
Fridays in Lent suppers, without any meat.  They usually have something like
Stations of the Cross (they call it 'stations' but you would hardly recognize them).
Then afterwards, the supper.  One parish started doing the supper first and then
the stations, but they had to stop that because nobody was going to stations
anymore, they just hung out and talked in the dining hall.  

...Msgr. Perez explained this a few months ago in catechism class, something that has been "swept under the rug" ever since Vatican II, and that is, that the
WEEKLY abstinence on Friday THROUGHOUT THE YEAR has not been abrogated.
All Pope Paul VI did was to introduce one of the pernicious 'options' that are
so endemic in the NovusOrdo, and this one is that you still have the obligation,
under pain of mortal sin, to do some kind of penitential practice on every
Friday of the year.  But how often do you hear it explained that way?  The
simple thing to do is just don't eat flesh meat on Friday.  Because if you choose
the option of replacing that with some other penance, it MUST be a penance
that is AT LEAST as difficult as not eating flesh meat.  

Good point.  And absolutely right; I think most in the Novus Ordo think it's not required anymore, so don't bother with any penance at all.  Strangely enough, even people who don't seem to be good practicing Catholics in other, much more important laws, often still keep the Friday abstinence during Lent, because as you point out later, it isn't so hard when it is known to be required, and is a habit.  

We don't know how good we have it.  All we are required to do is abstain from
meat on every Friday of the year - INCLUDING Fridays of Lent (and Ash
Wednesday), and we would be in the habit every week to do the right thing.  
Then it isn't so hard, SO LONG AS IT IS A REGULAR HABIT.  What makes it
DIFFICULT is when we STOP making it a regular habit!
So you see, while people are under the false
impression that Paul VI made things easier,
in fact, he made things more difficult.  

Very good points.

Well, as long as the SSPX recognizes the new code of canon law, they can't really teach any differently.  Of course the priest can recommend the traditional fast, but a society priest that was to oblige his congregation to those rules would be at odds with the 'official' position of the Society.

Not saying this is right, just pointing out that I'm not too sure you can blame a society priest for this.  Though I'd raise a few eyebrows if he said this and didn't at least recommend the traditional fast.

I attend a society chapel but do not follow the 83 disciplines, FWIW.

Agreed on all three paragraphs. He did not recommend the traditional fast or refer to the changes in Canon Law. (I am the one who was there.)

This one sentence about the Lenten Fast is just a fragment of the worst sermon I have ever heard at a Society chapel.

Another disturbing trend that I have observed is the priest telling "stories" (almost always about himself) in the sermon. Sure, an occasional anecdote is fine, and can serve an edifying purpose, but those of you who came from the NO know what I mean.

A significant difference I noticed when beginning to assist at the TLM several years ago was that the priests almost never talked about themselves; it was always about God.