Daily Archives: May 31, 2012
SSPX And Mass Obligation: Why I think The CDF Is Right
This blog post from Queen Of Martyrs Press is now everywhere, but I think the excitement is very probably undeserved.
I do not read the letter that you can see by clicking on the link as saying that Mass attendance at an SSPX chapel is now not in order anymore.
If you read the letter attentively, you will see the question is very short and very dangerous:
[…] would a Catholic fulfill his Mass obligation by assisting at Holy Mass by attending this “Friends of the Society of St. Pius X” chapel called __________ Roman Catholic Church in _______,_______?
Mind: a “chapel” of “friends” of the SSPX. Now by definition a friend of the SSPX is not a member of the SSPX. If a priest is a member he is a member, not a “friend of”.
Who are, then, these “friends” of the SSPX? For what we – and the CDF – know, it can be any sedevacantist group on earth, as I assume many of those – and many of those attending by them, possibly in perfect good faith – would define themselves without any great difficulty as “friends” of the SSPX. Are they enemies of the SSPX? Certainly not. Do they think they would refuse an invitation to lunch from an SSPX priest? I don’t think so. Granted, you will find Sedevacantists saying they are not friends of the SSPX because they support a usurper etc., but in real life I think it far more probable even the majority of Sedevacantists would express their disagreement with the SSPX, but still consider them “friends”. This is in my eyes confirmed by the well-known episode of Archbishop Lefebvre adopting the Missal of 1962 to avoid having the SSPX chapels invaded by Sedevacantists, a clear sign the SSPX’s acceptance of the Pope as the head of the Church would not have stopped the Sedevacantist “friends” of the SSPX from filling their pews!
Now put yourselves in the shoes of the members of the CDF who had to answer the question as it was posed: if they had answered yes, a simple open claim of friendship with the SSPX would have been enough to consider the attendance at such masses fulfilment of the Sunday mass obligation.
Is it so surprising the CDF answered the question in the negative?
EDIT: from Rorate, the confirmation from the US District of the SSPX the chapel in question (deleted in the letter, but known to them and clearly to the CDF) is not among their “friends”. Therefore, they simply call themselves – or were called by the writer of the letter – in that way. Which is, understandably, not enough. Even if they had been, I would still say there is a difference for a faithful Catholic whether he attends to a SSPX chapel or to a chapel of friends, but not part of the order.
“For Greater Glory”: What Price Would You Pay For Freedom?
What about the price of a cinema ticket?
Too much to ask?
Remember, folks: the three days starting on Friday are decisive.
On Monday it will be too late.
And yes, everyone else has things to do, too… 😉
EDIT: The press has already started dissing this movie as too Catholic, and spitting the usual hate. As I write, the critics (ok, you’ll say they are irrelevant; perhaps they are, perhaps they aren’t…) on rotten tomatoes only give it 4.5/10.
Please, please help give them a lesson!
EDIT II: As the weekend starts on the East Coast, please please please twit the link of the movie to all your friends and acquaintances! Put it in your blog! Tell everyone you are going to see this movie! Go to see the movie and tell encourage others to do the same! On Monday it might be too late!
You must be logged in to post a comment.