Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Matthew on April 12, 2019, 02:47:27 PM
-
NOTE: This is purely a hypothetical scenario. I have no intention to demean Independent priests, or to infer that they are any more likely per-capita to offer sloppy Masses than priests belonging to some other organization.
An SSPX priest offering a meticulous, liturgically perfect High Mass at St. Isidore's (a building that was built by Trads, and looks like an actual church) with top-notch equipment, plenty of servers who practice regularly, accompanied by a beautiful well-rehearsed schola of 12 men, surrounded by 500 Faithful and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of art, statues, architecture...
...is in the same canonical status, and is just as "disobedient", as ...
some laid-back "independent priest" saying Mass quickly and/or sloppily in a hotel or garage with poor/minimal equipment, using a single altar server who barely knows the responses, for a single family of 5.
Both operate under supplied jurisdiction and are 100% -- not 90%, 99% or 99.9% -- as legitimate as each other.
Let that sink in. Some SSPXers really need to internalize this truth!
-
some laid-back "independent priest" saying Mass quickly and/or sloppily in a hotel or garage with poor/minimal equipment, using a single altar server who barely knows the responses, for a single family of 5.
I have a technical issue with this part:
Saying Mass quickly and/or sloppily is sacrilegious and for the most part, I don't think independent priests do it.
In their struggles, they've learned to provide reverence to the Most Perfect Sacrifice and worship to God the Father.
On the contrary, I do think the neo-SSPX is purposefully instructing their priest to celebrate "Speed Masses".
A neo-SSPX "Speed Mass" is where the priests and altar servers utter rapid, monotone Latin responses without inflection or reverent pauses. The pace is so fast that the faithful can't keep-up with them in their missals. It seems they want the faithful to think they are very busy men who need to finish-up Mass to attend to other important business. It is sacrilegious.
Now, if you ask them, they won't admit their "Speed Masses" were instructed by Menzingen on-down through the management chain, all the way to Fr. Le Roux and the seminary.
I've seen Speed Masses throughout their chapels and the offenders are mainly the new priests and the older generation of political sycophants, like Fr. Asher. This late vocation Texan is notorious for having: "The fastest Mass in the West"
If you compare the older (Bp. Williamson seminary era) SSPX priest's Mass speeds, they are significantly slower and more reverent.
I submit that this Mass speed issue can be measured and docuмented to show a "significant correlation", between new and old SSPX priests.
In conclusion, ask yourself, "Why would the new SSPX embrace speeding through the Mass Liturgy?"
Would inculcating a Speed Mass and the resulting disrespect for the Tridentine Liturgy be a likely a prelude to embracing a hybrid mass ?
Is it a coincidence that Bp Fellay's favorite Pope, Benedict XVI, has made statements of instituting a hybrid mass more than once?
-
WHOOSH!
You totally missed the point. My post was not meant to compliment the SSPX, nor to criticize independent priests. I had hoped that people would understand my point -- apparently I have to spell everything out in laborious detail.
I was drawing up a hypothetical, and since the first large "pre-Vatican II church" looking chapel I could think of was St. Isidore's, I went with the SSPX to be the elaborate Mass. By process of elimination, that left the Independent to be "the simple and sloppy" Mass I was contrasting with.
But it's more than that. Which is more likely to have simpler organization structure, less money in the bank, simpler chapels, smaller congregations, etc.? Independents of course. My point is that the SSPX, due to its size, money, power, years in business, etc. often manages to dazzle the Faithful into confusing it with the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church itself. "Outside the Church there is no salvation. Ergo, outside the SSPX there is no salvation!"
Although a Mass said too fast would indeed be a sacrilege, it wouldn't affect its canonical status, which is the only thing I'm discussing here.
-
WHOOSH!
You totally missed the point. My post was not meant to compliment the SSPX, nor to criticize independent priests. I had hoped that people would understand my point -- apparently I have to spell everything out in laborious detail.
I was drawing up a hypothetical, and since the first large "pre-Vatican II church" looking chapel I could think of was St. Isidore's, I went with the SSPX to be the elaborate Mass. By process of elimination, that left the Independent to be "the simple and sloppy" Mass I was contrasting with.
But it's more than that. Which is more likely to have simpler organization structure, less money in the bank, simpler chapels, smaller congregations, etc.? Independents of course. My point is that the SSPX, due to its size, money, power, years in business, etc. often manages to dazzle the Faithful into confusing it with the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church itself. "Outside the Church there is no salvation. Ergo, outside the SSPX there is no salvation!"
Although a Mass said too fast would indeed be a sacrilege, it wouldn't affect its canonical status, which is the only thing I'm discussing here.
Acknowledge your point Matthew.
I got it the first time, but your inclusion of "quick & sloppy" rang a bell and I had to answer it :farmer:
The Speed Mass issue is for another topic.
-
It blows my mind every time I think about it: a small chapel with ZERO in the bank is just as legit as the SSPX which has millions.
A small chapel started in a warehouse or garage last year is just as legit as an SSPX chapel that started in 1975.
A huge chapel church like St. Isidore's packed with 500 parishioners is just as legit as a garage chapel with 1 family in attendance.
A huge, almost 50 year old organization like the SSPX is just as legit as the SAJM which started recently.
Supplied jurisdiction is given by the Church to both, in equal measure.
...and let's not forget:
The SSPX with hundreds of priests has just as much authority to "play Pope", put its foot down, or make definitive decisions on theological controversies -- individually as priests or collectively as a Council -- as a single independent priest.
These statements appear to be boring, common sense assertions that everyone accepts. But do they? Human nature is apt to be dazzled by numbers, appearances, glitz, legacy, reputation, and so on.
I've actually spoken in person with SSPX parishioners who are thus dazzled. They can offer no concrete reasons why the SSPX is somehow more legit or somehow less disobedient than, say, a Resistance chapel. It's all about FEELINGS. When you go to an SSPX chapel, it FEELS more legit for all the reasons I listed above.
-
Agree on all points, Matthew. Independent priests are attacked from all sides - sedevacantists and the sspx. What a shame.
-
NOTE: This is purely a hypothetical scenario. I have no intention to demean Independent priests, or to infer that they are any more likely per-capita to offer sloppy Masses than priests belonging to some other organization.
An SSPX priest offering a meticulous, liturgically perfect High Mass at St. Isidore's (a building that was built by Trads, and looks like an actual church) with top-notch equipment, plenty of servers who practice regularly, accompanied by a beautiful well-rehearsed schola of 12 men, surrounded by 500 Faithful and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of art, statues, architecture...
...is in the same canonical status, and is just as "disobedient", as ...
some laid-back "independent priest" saying Mass quickly and/or sloppily in a hotel or garage with poor/minimal equipment, using a single altar server who barely knows the responses, for a single family of 5.
Both operate under supplied jurisdiction and are 100% -- not 90%, 99% or 99.9% -- as legitimate as each other.
Let that sink in. Some SSPXers really need to internalize this truth!
You are absolutely right and how I wish parishioners at Our Lady of Sorrows in Phx would see that.
If they would remove their rose colored sspx issued glasses long enough to see the truth maybe they would seek out a independent priest or pool the money they withheld to start a new community. There are options out there
I would go as far as saying that the independent Priest and Mass you described is far more pleasing to God then a Mass with all the bells and smells said in a church built on a foundation of lies,deceit,theft and intimidation.
-
Matthew:
I've actually spoken in person with SSPX parishioners who are thus dazzled. They can offer no concrete reasons why the SSPX is somehow more legit or somehow less disobedient than, say, a Resistance chapel. It's all about FEELINGS. When you go to an SSPX chapel, it FEELS more legit for all the reasons I listed above.
I have no problem personally with Matthew's assessment. But it would be interesting to hear reaction from X to his comments on this thread.
-
Matthew:
I have no problem personally with Matthew's assessment. But it would be interesting to hear reaction from X to his comments on this thread.
Oh, you're talking about the "should we start a large SSPX replacement organization, or do the loose association of independent priests thing".
If it makes you or others feel better, you can replace "independent" with "SAJM", "MC-SPX", "traditional religious congregation not in union with the SSPX", "Resistance", "SSPV", etc.
I'm purposely passing over the issue that strictly speaking, there should be no "independent" priests. A priest is fundamentally a bishop's helper. The Crisis in the Church doesn't change that. We can't throw Canon Law completely to the wind just because the Church is in crisis.
Therefore, any Trad priest has the obligation to seek out a faithful Trad bishop and place himself under him. It is only when such isn't available (not locally, not in your country, not worldwide) then you can operate completely on your own. But who qualifies for that today? There are at least 4 faithful bishops out there. Any priest choosing to be his own highest authority is doing it for selfish and base reasons. Each priest needs to work with and under SOME bishop, even if his apostolate appears to be quite independent on the surface.
-
I have never met a laid-back, independent priest that says Mass quickly or sloppily.
-
I have never met a laid-back, independent priest that says Mass quickly or sloppily.
Nevertheless, here is my response:
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/thought-for-the-day-sspx-deluxe-vs-independent-sloppy/msg649571/#msg649571 (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/thought-for-the-day-sspx-deluxe-vs-independent-sloppy/msg649571/#msg649571)
-
When I see a Mass said fast, it makes me want to cry! Children need to be able to assist Mass, keep up, enjoy! If not, the youth could be lost. The Mass is to be appreciated, loved, needed etc. I knew an independent priest, who had a visiting priest. That priest bragged about his 30 min.Mass and the independent priest told the visiting priest that he was no longer welcomed.
-
I've attended a few sloppy masses in my day. Not many, but priests are only human. They make mistakes. Once, at an FSSP mass, the priest forgot to consecrate the Precious Blood.
The OP makes a good point. Even if a Mass is sloppily done, it is still valid and licit given the right conditions. Supplied jurisdiction is still very a factor (given that the church is occupied by a Modernist sect), whether the priest offering the Mass is SSPX or independent. It was a hypothetical in that even if an independent priest offers a sloppy mass, it's just as valid and licit as a beautiful SSPX Mass.
-
I've seen Speed Masses throughout their chapels and the offenders are mainly the new priests and the older generation of political sycophants, like Fr. Asher. This late vocation Texan is notorious for having: "The fastest Mass in the West"
The first time i went to a mass by fr. Asher i thought to myself, "this CAN'T be reverent." Reminded me of fr. Pazat (who i believe left the clerical state) who heaved deep sighs before each sentence in the mass.
20 min is NOT enough tome to say a reverent mass.
-
Yes, I have a book by St. Alphonsus, where the Doctor says a Priest who tries to just rapidly rush through Holy Mass risks committing mortal sin. Holy Mass is the very Sacrifice of Calvary, the most sublime act of our religion, it must be offered with becoming reverence.
St. Alphonsus says, "here it is necessary to consider what the same Council of Trent says in another place, that the ceremonies have been instituted by the Church in order to excite in the faithful the veneration and esteem due to so great a Sacrifice, and to the most sublime mysteries that it contains. The Church, says the holy Council, has employed ceremonies, whereby both the majesty of so great a Sacrifice might be recommended and the minds of the faithful be excited, by those visible signs of religion and piety, to the contemplation of those most sublime things which are hidden in this Sacrifice.
But instead of inspiring reverence, these ceremonies, when performed with great haste, diminish and destroy the veneration of the people for so holy a mystery. Peter de Blois says that the irreverence with which Mass is celebrated makes people think little of the most holy sacrament. 2 This scandal cannot be excused from mortal sin. Hence in the year 1583 the Council of Tours ordained that priests should be well instructed in the ceremonies of the Mass: For fear that the people intrusted to their care, far from entertaining veneration for our divine mysteries, might regard them only with indifference. How can priests expect by Masses said with such irreverence to obtain graces from God, when during the oblation of these Masses they offend and dishonor him more than they honor him ? Should a priest not believe in the most holy sacrament of the altar, he would offend God; but it is a still greater offence to believe in it, and to celebrate Mass without due reverence, and thus make the people who are present lose their veneration for the holy sacrament ... in like manner, seculars, seeing a priest treat the Mass with such irreverence, lose their respect and veneration for it. A Mass said with rever ence excites devotion in all who are present at it; but, on the other hand, a Mass celebrated with irreverence destroys devotion and even faith in those that are present." (Dignities and Duties of a Priest, p. 220-222)
Regarding the OP, I think it's preferable to always (1) work together under a Bishop, and (2) if possible, seek and obtain canonical normalization. A Traditional Catholic Bishop almost has a right to exercise habitual jurisdiction and teaching authority over his subjects, both Priests and Faithful, and they in their turn ought to give him respect and obedience as their superior and head. So, why should our Traditional Bishops be compelled to rely only on supplied jurisdiction? They are free to ask for OJ from the Pope, as in fact they did.
Agree or disagree, Bishop Fellay said the SSPX now has Ordinary Jurisdiction, after Pope Francis' act in favor of the Society some years ago, I believe it was in 2015. But more broadly, all of us, unless we are Popes, are bound to be subject to some habitual jurisdiction in the Catholic Church. The Faithful to their Priests, the Priests to their Bishops. That's the normal and natural order in the Church. When Priests are persecuted and that's temporarily not possible, sure, go independent. As soon as it becomes possible again, imho, the right thing for an independent Priest to do is to place himself under obedience and subjection to a Bishop. What I really wish is that the SSPX and Resistance will begin working together some day in the future, some 700 Priests under 7 Bishops, all working united as one.
-
The OP makes a good point. Even if a Mass is sloppily done, it is still valid and licit given the right conditions.
If the sloppiness is habitual and not a one-time thing, this would be a grave sin.
-
If the sloppiness is habitual and not a one-time thing, this would be a grave sin.
Yes, I think you're right, but notice that I said valid and licit given the right conditions. And it would depend of what constitutes "sloppy." I don't have any interest in getting into the minute details of what that might be. If you'd like to do so, go ahead.
-
I once knew an Indult priest (not an FSSP) who sped thru Mass so quickly that you literally might miss the Elevation of the Sacred Host if you blinked. It was so disconcerting and so fundamentally disturbing. There was not a second - not even one second - to adore Our Lord at the elevation.
Then he sped thru the Leonine prayers at the end of Mass so fast the faithful couldn't even keep up, and he would start the next Hail Mary before they were done reciting the response part.
I wanted to say something to him after, but I didn't. I regret that now. He had a very badly ingrained habit.
-
The first time i went to a mass by fr. Asher i thought to myself, "this CAN'T be reverent." Reminded me of fr. Pazat (who i believe left the clerical state) who heaved deep sighs before each sentence in the mass.
20 min is NOT enough tome to say a reverent mass.
Fr. Pazat is one of the Priests at Our Lady of Sorrows in Phx. Az.
-
This talk of "Speed Masses" has me wondering, how long (roughly) should a Mass be?
-
I once knew an Indult priest (not an FSSP) who sped thru Mass so quickly that you literally might miss the Elevation of the Sacred Host if you blinked. It was so disconcerting and so fundamentally disturbing. There was not a second - not even one second - to adore Our Lord at the elevation.
Then he sped thru the Leonine prayers at the end of Mass so fast the faithful couldn't even keep up, and he would start the next Hail Mary before they were done reciting the response part.
I wanted to say something to him after, but I didn't. I regret that now. He had a very badly ingrained habit.
Just guessing this Indult priest had an agenda against the TLM ?
Racing through the Tridentine Mass would be one way of protesting it.
-
Just guessing this Indult priest had an agenda against the TLM ?
Racing through the Tridentine Mass would be one way of protesting it.
With that logic, many priests in the sspx have an agends against the TLM, especially "the fastest mass in the west," fr. Asher.
-
With that logic, many priests in the sspx have an agends against the TLM, especially "the fastest mass in the west," fr. Asher.
IMHO, there's a important difference in intent between the "Indulted fast" and "SSPX fast" Masses:
1. Often, the Novus ordo trained priest lacks fluency in the TLM liturgy and proficiency in the Mass rubrics.
He could just be an awkward fill-in on a Diocese indult Mass schedule established by the local bishop?
Or, he could harbor true resentment for having to celebrate it. I've heard comments from indulted
Novus ordo church pastors, indicating they think it's a pain in the butt to have the TLM in their Church.
Comments such as, "Oh, traditionalist think they're so holy with their exclusive Mass".
"Exclusive" being the operative word, implying trads look down upon the Novus ordo faithful wanting to cut them out.
Lastly, the Novus ordo priest could just be embarrassed and speeds through the TLM to cover-up errors in Latin or rubrics.
2. The SSPX Speed Mass is more sinister in that for those who have been given much, much is expected.
The younger priests have obviously been formed to speed through the Mass. So in part, they are only following orders.
But, intuitively, they know it's wrong. Sadly they've been formed in scandal by their priestly teachers.
But the older priests clearly know better. They know the Holy reverence attributed to the Mass by +ABL.
In this "Fr. Asher type" SSPX priest, there is a distinct trad arrogance. This is the "know-it-all" spirit plaguing tradition.
It's the spirit of men pumped-up as experts in the TLM. Men who've become to think they have the authority to do what
they want with the Mass. "I'm SSPX, therefore I have the license for tradition".
They speed through the Holy Sacrifice at their own peril.
In conclusion, I'm happy to say, this sacrilege will not last.
(https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcatholicismpure.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F02%2Fholy-sacrifice-of-the-mass.jpg&f=1)
-
The first time i went to a mass by fr. Asher i thought to myself, "this CAN'T be reverent." Reminded me of fr. Pazat (who i believe left the clerical state) who heaved deep sighs before each sentence in the mass.
20 min is NOT enough tome to say a reverent mass.
Two things:
1. There are two Fr. Pazat's in the SSPX. One of them is now at Our Lady of Sorrows.
2. As far as the sighs go, the one I know has SIGNIFICANT health problems, so that could be part of it.
-
As far as the sighs go, the one I know has SIGNIFICANT health problems, so that could be part of it.
Whether voluntary or involuntary, breathing abnormalities that could be interpreted as mere sighs could be caused by any of these:
• Congestive Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (better known by initials COPD), which I suppose is most common in the U.S.A. as the temporal reward for decades of heavy smoking. Perhaps only housekeepers, sacristans, trusted "altar boys", and long-time male parishoners would even be aware of such a habit, customarily confined to priests' residences or cells &c. Comments would be needed from, e.g., Matthew or Ladislaus, to inform readers on the extent to which the polluting habit existed within their experiences in seminaries.
• Shortness of breath from acute anemia, which can appear in senior years as an incurable blood disease that's unrelated to any habit of smoking (or not). Altho' "heav[ing] deep sighs before each sentence in the mass", if heard also in sermons or normal conversation, would be a symptom waaay into the life-threatening range.
• (Anything else? [×])
I'd not be surprised if local fire marshalls refused to allow use of otherwise common prescribed oxygen gas (O2) in the sanctuary, where altar candles or charcoal lit for incense could be considered an unacceptable fire hazard. So enduring a worsening shortage of O2 during Mass might be a priest's private cross to bear in return for continuing to celebrate Mass.
-------
Note ×: I suppose many maladies or infirmities could be added to this list, because I have no formal training in medicine.