Father Ortiz gave a conference today in Toronto and and made it clear that we should not attend SSPX masses, not because of what they are teaching, but because of the difficulties that they are not teaching about. That is enough to recommend that we stay away from SSPX masses at this time.

This being on the verge of having no Mass to attend is a growing theme.



When this finally happens to you, you have become a 'home-aloner' and
how do you raise a family like that??


It seems Bishop Williamson has been hinting at this without giving specifics.



http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=23959&min=26&num=15

Great posts, Sean.  A number of us resistors are currently in a "holding pattern".  We definitely are aware of the looming dangers; watching what transpires in our local Chapels very carefully - waiting for "the other shoe to drop".

As +Williamson has advised:  "Watch and pray".

It seems to be inevitable that sooner or later, in the absence of a Resistance Priest, we'll be at home with our rosaries, scapulars, and missals.  Kyrie Eleison!

I know the Japanese went through such a trial in the 18th and 19th centuries.  
Their example should be for our edification.  

Father Ortiz gave a conference today in Toronto and and made it clear that we should not attend SSPX masses, not because of what they are teaching, but because of the difficulties that they are not teaching about. That is enough to recommend that we stay away from SSPX masses at this time.

So when we avoid SSPX Mass, and we have no alternative nearby (I fortunately
am not presently in that predicament! but I appreciate hearing about others who
are!), then you stay home with your Rosaries, scapulars and missals?  



I hope that isn't the end of this discussion!!



Because even the Japanese didn't end it there.  They established a "loose
association of independent families" who met on carefully planned times
and places to have community prayer, and some kind of ritual.  They had
no priest, and they saw no priest from generation unto generation.  Imagine
that!  No Holy Communion (they relied on spiritual Communion), no
confirmations (they relied on the grace of Baptism), no Sacrament of Penance
(they seem to have developed a rigor for achieving perfect contrition -
which, BTW should be OUR ABIDING OBJECTIVE - to achieve in our lives
an ability to attain perfect contrition), no Extreme Unction (they relied on
the fervent prayer of family and friends to sustain them in their final agony),
no Holy Orders (obviously!), but only Baptism.  

All they had was baptism, their Rosary, brown scapulars (which require no
blessing from a priest - but "should" be invested by a priest - they relied on
their fervent desire to be invested for they had no priest), and missals.

And through it all, they passed on the tradition of what they would look for
one day when the priests would return.  

The "orange light" syndrome should be an opportunity to prepare for what is
coming down the pike.  Lots of people are packing in long-term storage food
and getting ready to be holed up for a year or more when problems start.
But what about spiritual preparations?  How will you make do without Mass
and the sacraments for an extended time?

It seems to me that some manner of loose association of Catholic families is
in order.  We should be able to meet with each other, on prearrangement, in
private, without a priest (although a priest would be wonderful!), and say the
family Rosary together, maybe some other prayers like the Angelus (Regina
Coeli this time of year!), litany of Loretto, or of the saints, or of the Sacred
Heart, or St. Joseph, the Fatima prayers..


..Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
I adore Thee profoundly, and I offer Thee the most
sacred Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord
Jesus Christ, present in all the tabernacles of the
world, in reparation for the outrages, sacrileges
and indifference with which He is offended. And
through the infinite merits of His most Sacred
Heart, and of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg
Thee for the conversion of poor sinners..

..My God, my God, I adore thee in the Most Blessed
Sacrament..

..O my God, it is for love of Thee, for the conversion
of sinners, for the Holy Father, and in reparation for
sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary..



The three Fatima children were taught by the Angel of Peace, patron of Portugal,
to repeat this prayer three times.  BTW that was not "useless repetition."

N.B. The Archangel Michael never told anyone not to pray "una cuм".

It is believed that this was none other than St. Michael the Archangel, for he
is the patron saint of Portugal.  And what is the prayer to St. Michael that
Pope Leo XIII proposed that we add to the Mass?


St. Michael, Archangel, defend us in battle.  Be
our defense against the wickedness and snares of
the devil.  Rebuke him, we pray, and do thou, O
prince of the heavenly host, cast into hell satan
and all the other wicked spirits who prowl about
the world seeking the ruin of souls!  Amen.


Blessed Jacinta of Fatima, the child whose specialty was reparation for sins
committed against purity, was devoted to prayers for the Holy Father, "who
will have much to suffer."  Blessed Jacinta never said to anyone that prayers
"una cuм" should be somehow avoided, did she?  No, she did not.

It was 1916 when the three children had this apparition and Holy Communion,
brought to them by an angel.  The Leonine prayers after Low Mass had only
been in use for about 20 years at the time.  But that means that for 20 years,
millions of Catholics had been praying to St. Michael the Archangel by NAME,
asking for him to thrust into hell satan and all the other evil spirits who roam
about the earth for the ruin of souls, which hearkens to the Scripture of St.
Paul, "like a lion that roams about the world seeing whom it may devour."  

And therefore, this apparition of the Angel could be seen as St. Michael's
answer to this prayer of millions of Catholics over a span of 20 years.  

It seems to me that this long period of time is instructive.  This was a big
request and such things are not answered overnight.  It is for our
edification that it might take years.  

In Toronto, our core grouo has stayed home since January.

Father Pfeffer has been to Toronto monthly, even, had to believe, Christmas and Easter. God will provide (and Father helped a lot!).

We went through the usual questions and we have other members who have been unable to stay away. Everybody does what they can handle.

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Emerertiana

There were some articles on this forum about Fr Pfeiffer saying not to attend Una cuм Masses.  If anyone can find these articles, please post them on this thread.

I doubt he ever said such a thing. Since you made the statement, why don't you post the relevant quotes?

Don't know about una cuм, but Fr. Pfeieffer was saying not to go to SSPX around March 13-15; it's in a video.   Sean Johnson began a thread called "There is no Red Light" on March 15, and he references Fr. Pfieffer's sermon.  Emerentiana did not make this subject up.  I believe one of the threads dealing with this subject may have been deleted, but the video of Fr. Pfeiffer's sermon will be around somewhere.

Yes, the issue would be SSPX versus "Resistance" Masses. This has nothing to do with "una cuм."

I wasn't claiming she "made it up," just that she was entirely mistaken about the reason. It's not a small issue nor a small error. It implies these men are sedevacantists when they are not.

Quote from: SJB

Yes, the issue would be SSPX versus "Resistance" Masses. This has nothing to do with "una cuм."

I wasn't claiming she "made it up," just that she was entirely mistaken about the reason. It's not a small issue nor a small error. It implies these men are sedevacantists when they are not.

OK.  I've no idea if the people staying home are thinking along those lines, either.

Seriously, why would they "think along those lines" in the first place? There seems to be no reason other that that one bites on the suggestion that Emerentiana made, which was without any merit whatsoever!

SJB, I think Fr. Pfeiffer did use the term "una cuм" but not in the sense of sedevacantism. If I remember the sermon and the sense correctly, he was implying you can't profess communion with those who have a fundamentally different viewpoint and applying that to the current SSPX superiors. Agree with him or not, and I think many here would disagree especially if an SSPX Mass was all they had, that was what Fr. Pfeiffer said. I recall it was Seraphim who posted the topic containing the sermon, he or someone else can correct me if it was otherwise.

Then he's fallen into the same error as some sedevacantists. Was he saying an SSPX mass is no longer a Catholic Mass?

Quote from: Nishant

...he was implying you can't profess communion with those who have a fundamentally different viewpoint ...

Viewpoint on what? Anything he may deem important?

"In necessary things unity, in doubtful things liberty, in all things charity." - St. Augustine

Yeah, differences on the regularization with Rome. I can't find the sermon now though, so I'll wait for someone else who has a better idea to clarify it for you.

Even now the SSPX says that they may or may not be valid priests, as they sometimes, but not always, re-ordain Novus Ordo priests who come to the SSPX conditionally.

I realize I'm a newish member here who's not an SSPX adherent, so I'm unfamiliar with its organizational details, and I suppose my idea below might already have occurred to CathInfo members of longer standing:

Wouldn't SSPX have joyfully announced each & every ordination--even 'conditional' ordinations--by Abp. Lefebvre or the 4 bishops he consecrated, or each incoming transfer from the Novus Ordo?  It'd be analogous to parish-newsletter columns announcing baptisms or welcoming new families.  It seems that somewhere, there's gotta be some combination of SSPX adherents, either supporting or nonhostile to the Resistance, who'd collectively have access to a complete set of SSPX periodicals.

If so, couldn't a list of priests ordained by SSPX be compiled by the Resistance and distributed--or even made available in an on-line database?  Some mysteries might be solved by Novus Ordo diocesan periodicals, which I'd expect to announce their installations/"ordinations" comparably joyfully. Wouldn't such a project resolve, to the greatest degree tractable, issues arising about the validity of orders of the vast majority of "priests" assigned to SSPX chapels?  Or are so many independent priests joining SSPX (after traditional ordination) that compilers would become entangled in tracing the apostolic lineages of the ordaining bishops?

Would all that incur too much risk of litigation from Menzingen, at the direction of Bp. Fellay, and pursued by "The Crow"?  Is a Resistance in the U.S.A., which I assume is free of any property whose deed is under the thumb of Menzingen, within the legal reach of attempts at censorship from Menzingen?