Dubium V: Does the SSPX think that priests and laity commit a sin, either due to object or circumstances, by celebrating and assisting at a Mass of Pope Paul VI? The SSPX teaches that the Mass of Pope Paul VI is defective as a liturgical rite and, even if valid and offered with reverence, it will tend to weaken faith over time. A Brief Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, also known as “The Ottaviani Intervention,” remains the seminal work of explanation in this regard, and the experience of the last half-century confirms its conclusions. So, does the SSPX think that priests and laity commit a sin, either due to object or circumstances, by celebrating and assisting at a Mass of Pope Paul VI? The SSPX answers, “not necessarily,” because it distinguishes between the evil of a defective rite and the act of attendance at such a rite. The rite is objectively deficient and will necessarily erode faith over time. Attendance at such a rite is not intrinsically evil because circumstances may exist—ignorance, charity, coercion, etc.—to make it excusable. For example, a soul with a genuine desire for sanctity who has never heard of the TLM, or has never been in a position to understand the nocive effect of the Mass of Pope Paul VI, would not sin by attendance at this rite on account of what the moral theologians call invincible ignorance. Indeed, the soul might spiritually benefit by attendance, but this is not on account of the rite per se, only per accidens. On the other hand, if a soul perceives the deficiency of the Mass of Pope Paul VI and has no sufficient reason to justify attendance, then that soul would sin. ____________________________________________ I am presenting my thoughts and reactions based on my position as both a Catholic currently attending a Novus Ordo Parish and as a Deacon in the Catholic Church. I am currently within a 30-minute drive of one of the four TLM parishes within the Diocese of Syracuse. My assigned duties are too restrictive to allow me to frequent the TLM parish in Oswego though I do so maybe twice a year. Firstly, I agree that most prayers of the Latin version of 1st Eucharistic Prayer do closely follow the Canon of the TLM, and when I attend a Novus Ordo Mass in which said Canon is selected, I'm very pleased. My Pastor, however, is from Africa, and due to language difficulty has never chosen the 1st Eucharistic prayer. Nor has Msgr. Francis chosen to pray ad orientem. But he is a wonderful orthodox priest. I firmly disagree with the above highlight stating absence from the TLM will necessarily erode the faith of an active Catholic. Beauty of liturgical form is a definitive plus, but a poor interior disposition of any soul, is the governing force which determines loss of faith. Beauty of liturgical gestures, a ad orientem posture, and the richer prayers of the TLM, especially with prayers within the Offertory, are a great plus. If my circumstances were different, attendance at the TLM would prove advantageous. In addition, the sad fact that the Novus Ordo has undergone a number of revisions makes it the probable candidate in which the abomination of desolation will be embedded. Another negative, in my humble opinion, is the higher number receiving Holy Communion in the hand. To any faithful TLM'er who pressed me to switch now because of their perceived view of intrinsic poverty embedded in the Novus Ordo, I would share that frequent attendance at Holy Mass over 20 years with our children contributed to the fact that all of my children remain faithful Catholics and those whom are married, are raising their children in like fashion. So to me, the ancient Rite with all its beauty is preferable, but not absolutely necessary. And the idea that it is sinful to attend the Novus Ordo is preposterous. That is a finishing point made in the above that detracts from an otherwise enlightening letter. O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee!
Interestingly, Cardinal Muller has caused the Pius X Society decision to be looked at in a different perspective:
Agree wholeheartedly. It feels like a pc answer. Ive nothing against SSPX... Im all for it but their answer imo essentially says yes, you are in a state of sin by attending NO if you are aware of and have access to TLM . The heart of question seems to me: Can the Church give her children a valid Mass that, by its nature, hurts their faith? Maybe a follow up ? Dubium: “Can a liturgical rite of the Mass, lawfully promulgated by the Supreme Pontiff and offered according to the approved books of the Catholic Church, be considered objectively harmful to the faith of Catholics and something that necessarily erodes the supernatural virtue of faith?” In end, I want TLM to be available but I don't see NO as damaging faith. Praying it resolves in Unity and Charity.
The Novus Ordo, in and of itself, is valid. Transubstantiation takes place, though I admit the richness of prayers have diminished compared to the TLM (the Offertory especially).
I am sympathetic to the SSPX. But their disobedience is troubling. But I can see how they've been pretty well driven off the edge. The old Mass was far, far better liturgy and yes the New Mass does tend to decrease reverence. I think for instance communion on the hand is very displeasing to God. Also there is a huge problem of talking and disrespect for the Blessed Sacrament in many Novus Ordo Churches. This is simply not an issue in Old Rite Churches. But in places were the New Rite is carried out properly things are a lot better.
Absolutely essential. E. Michael Jones has taken a very strong and uncompromising stance on this issue. Among many others, he makes the point that it is irrelevant if the ones dialoguing on behalf of The Church are far less morally upstanding than the members of SSPX, even if they are outright heretics. What matters is the Magisterium of the Church which remains as the Truth since Her Foundation by Christ, no matter what the opinions and failings of those who purport to represent her. Jones also says that to be a Catholic is to be in the Tradition, by definition. To claim, as do the SSPX, that they represent the true ‘tradition’, is to do so by their own authority, while it is The Church alone that holds Authority in defining what is Tradition. One alarming development is the statement by one prominent cleric in the SSPX that salvation is no longer to be found in any Novus Ordo parish. No Salvation Outside the SSPX is what that sounds like. They are beginning to resemble Gnostics, privileged with special attributes that qualify only them alone for salvation. If they carry out these consecrations of bishops in July, it will get ugly.
Obedience is such a key point. Humility and obedience are the two bulwark against the devil's deceptions.
Yes a St Peter said to Jesus when He proclaimed the Eucharist: John 6:68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. If we abandon the barque of Peter we head of, like satellites, into the darkness of Outer Space.
I agree. But my curiosity remains. In the negotiations between the Vatican and the Society, I wonder how the former handled the issue of the Society's obvious growth and the resultant need for more bishops. I wonder if the Vatican was willing to consecrate 2 or 3 newbies? We'll never know. What was the underling rationale for Rome?
The Donatist heresy reminds me that I am a broken, leaky vessel. The stupendous, unimaginable graces Christ pours into my soul so often go to waste, and that on top of my own selfishness. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! BUT...
