Author Topic: Shold I attend a Coptic DL? (Read 2041 times)

Canuk the Lionheart · « **on:** July 31, 2011, 07:52:33 PM »

Sadly for the next week there will be no Tridentine Mass in St. John’s (or on the entire Island), and seeing as I have grave doubts about the validity of the NO it isn’t really an option (I believe it’s mortally sinful to approach doubtful sacraments). The only other Church I am confident has valid sacraments is the local Coptic Church. Should I attend their Divine Liturgy to fulfill my Sunday obligation?

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #1 on:** July 31, 2011, 08:01:14 PM »

The Coptic Church isn't really considered Catholic. They're alot like the Old Catholics, only don't come off as being so Protestant like the Old Catholics. The Coptics broke away from the Church years ago. They hold most of the Catholics' views, except that they reject dogma on Mary and a few other things. They also believe Saturday is the Sabbath, not Sunday. So I don't think this chapel you speak of even offers Sunday Mass. I think you're better off staying home and making a Spiritual Communion. There are also three different Traditional groups that stream the TLM live on the internet from one of their chapels. The FSSP has a chapel that does it, as does a sede chapel and a small group in the mid-west.

Kephapaulos · « **Reply #2 on:** July 31, 2011, 08:05:16 PM »

If the liturgy is offered by a Coptic Catholic priest, then it is alright to go. If it is a Coptic Orthodox priest, then no.

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #3 on:** July 31, 2011, 08:10:43 PM »

It’s a Coptic Orthodox Church, but I was under the impression that in the lack of the Catholic Mass, we are permitted to receive the Sacraments (confession and the Eucharist) from the Orthodox; the only requirement being that there is a true lack of valid Catholic sacraments.

Sigismund · « **Reply #4 on:** July 31, 2011, 10:05:17 PM »

Well, the regulations after VCII, which you reject, would agree with you and allow you to go, even receiving Communion if the Coptic priest would allow it. I can image no trad argument for allowing this, though.

Kephapaulos · « **Reply #5 on:** July 31, 2011, 10:31:00 PM »

It is not permissible for a Catholic to attend any schismatic liturgy,even if there are no other options, because it would not be in communion with the Catholic Church.

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #6 on:** July 31, 2011, 10:45:51 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Well, the regulations after VCII, which you reject, would agree with you and allow you to go, even receiving Communion if the Coptic priest would allow it. I can image no trad argument for allowing this, though.

Ah that's from VII? I had no idea, still I'd have to read it in context and in the mean err on the side of caution and follow a live stream Mass. To be clear I don’t reject Vatican II, as much as I see it as a pastoral council which was the absolute weakest statement of the Faith, and greatest failure in the entire history of the Church… and thus it would just be better if we all just ignored it, and just believe what the Church has always taught, or viewed it through the eyes of tradition as Pope Benedict has said; the text of the Council itself is so vague, that to take it by itself could easily lead to heresy. The Novus Ordo however is something that is not Catholic period, it isn’t vague it’s blasphemous!

ajpirc · « **Reply #7 on:** August 01, 2011, 07:00:01 PM »

Quote from: Canuk the Lionheart

It’s a Coptic Orthodox Church, but I was under the impression that in the lack of the Catholic Mass, we are permitted to receive the Sacraments (confession and the Eucharist) from the Orthodox; the only requirement being that there is a true lack of valid Catholic sacraments.

You receiving Communion from an Orthodox Church would be like this:

Cardinal Ratzinger gives Communion in the hand to Protestant

or this:

Bill Clinton receives Holy Communion

If we're not in communion (and, no, "partial communion" doesn't count), don't receive their "Communion."

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #8 on:** August 01, 2011, 08:58:53 PM »

Quote from: ajpirc

Quote from: Canuk the Lionheart
It’s a Coptic Orthodox Church, but I was under the impression that in the lack of the Catholic Mass, we are permitted to receive the Sacraments (confession and the Eucharist) from the Orthodox; the only requirement being that there is a true lack of valid Catholic sacraments.

You receiving Communion from an Orthodox Church would be like this:

Cardinal Ratzinger gives Communion in the hand to Protestant

or this:

Bill Clinton receives Holy Communion

If we're not in communion (and, no, "partial communion" doesn't count), don't receive their "Communion."

Point WELL taken, so live stream Mass it is! And those pictures... they were disgusting and enlightening at the same time.

I'm so embarrassed, the title should read "Should I...". Sorry... :tinfoil:

s2srea · « **Reply #9 on:** August 03, 2011, 09:50:13 AM »

Quote from: ajpirc

You receiving Communion from an Orthodox Church would be like this:

Cardinal Ratzinger gives Communion in the hand to Protestant

or this:

Bill Clinton receives Holy Communion

If we're not in communion (and, no, "partial communion" doesn't count), don't receive their "Communion."

I'm not downplaying the points made in your links ajpirc, and I hope you don't take this wrong. But I always feel a little awkward when seeing these and like photos of non-Catholics receiving communion. I think what is a greater outrage is the fact that there are NO churches filled with Catholics where almost all partake in the sacrament of Holy Communion, yet the confession lines are empty is a greater tragedy; that there are men and women wearing short shorts, women with sleeveless and midriff-blouses, short skirts and dressed as if they're ready to go to the club. Meh, this disgusting feeling comes with being Traditional I guess.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #10 on:** August 03, 2011, 01:35:21 PM »

The Coptic Orthodox have their own "Pope" (forgot his name)... he came to visit their church which is not too far off from one of the SSPX chapels Houston. This being the case you can't go to their service without committing a mortal sin.

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #11 on:** August 03, 2011, 06:41:43 PM »

I’ve already decided to avoid it like I’ve avoided N.O. for the past few months. This really is unrelated to my OP but, I always thought that “pope” while most often in the Western World is only used to refer to the Bishop of Rome, the title itself was more or less synonymous with “patriarch”. If the Pope of Alexandria head of the Coptic Church and the Pope of the Armenian Orthodox Church were to reconcile with the Catholic Church would they retain the title or be known as “patriarchs”?

Sigismund · « **Reply #12 on:** August 03, 2011, 06:54:16 PM »

Pope, in the Coptic case, really means nothing more than Patriarch. He is not claiming that he is the pope of the universal church, in place of the Pope in Rome.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #13 on:** August 04, 2011, 03:17:38 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Pope, in the Coptic case, really means nothing more than Patriarch. He is not claiming that he is the pope of the universal church, in place of the Pope in Rome.

Ok. I didn't know that. Wherever I saw his name it was preceded by "Pope". I've never seen it used in relation to any of the other Eastern Patriarchs, schismatic or otherwise.

Sigismund · « **Reply #14 on:** August 04, 2011, 06:52:40 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Samurai

Quote from: Sigismund
Pope, in the Coptic case, really means nothing more than Patriarch. He is not claiming that he is the pope of the universal church, in place of the Pope in Rome.

Ok. I didn't know that. Wherever I saw his name it was preceded by "Pope". I've never seen it used in relation to any of the other Eastern Patriarchs, schismatic or otherwise.

None of the others use it.

If memory serves, the Coptic patriarch is Pope Shenouda II