Frequently asked questions about the SSPX

Discussion in 'Articles/Documents/Encyclicals' started by Admin, Feb 6, 2018.

  1. Admin

    Admin Administrator Staff Member

    Frequently asked questions about the SSPX
    The way it used to be

    Question 1
    What is the Society of St. Pius X?

    Question 2
    Who was Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre?

    Question 3
    Wasn't the SSPX lawfully suppressed?

    Question 4
    Wasn't Archbishop Lefebvre suspended from performing all sacred functions, along with all the priests he ordained?

    Question 5
    What is wrong with the Novus Ordo Missae?

    Question 6
    What are Catholics to think of Vatican II?

    Question 7
    But shouldn't we follow the pope?

    Question 8
    Shouldn't we accept the 1983 Code of Canon Law ?

    Question 9
    Do traditional priests have jurisdiction?

    Question 10
    Can we attend the Masses offered under the provisions of Summorum Pontificum?

    Question 11
    Wasn't Archbishop Lefebvre excommunicated for consecrating bishops unlawfully?

    Question 12
    Isn't the SSPX schismatic?

    Question 13
    What are we to think of the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP)?

    Question 14
    What are we to think of the new Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992)?

    Question 15
    What are we to think of the sedevacantists?



    Related Articles

    A Short History of the SSPX

    Get the full picture
    about the SSPX with this select group of informative conferences and articles

    SSPX and Rome: a complete listing!
    A complete listing of all articles, communiqués and press releases related to the discussions between the SSP X and the Holy See 8-13-2012

    1974 Declaration of Archbishop Lefebvre

    1979 Jubilee sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre

    1988 Episcopal Consecrations' sermon of Archbishop Lefebvre

    Suggested additional reading

    ..
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2018
  2. Admin

    Admin Administrator Staff Member

    The Indult Mass: should one attend it all?
    Fr. Marc Van Es
    Titled "The Attendance at Today's Sunday Masses", this article was originally featured in the June 1994 issue of The Angelus.


    After He had created in six days the universe and all it contains, God rested on the seventh day.[1] Thus, it was by this "divine repose" that the duty for man to reserve for God a part of his weekly time was foreshadowed; a duty which is one of the elements of religion due and owed to the Creator by the creature. Meanwhile, this natural duty was not specified except by the Mosaic law,[2] which had fixed its observance on the last day of the week, the Sabbath and which had established its forms. However, the duty to sanctify the Sabbath was imposed only on the Jewish people. Then, under the New Law a change took place; in memory of the Resurrection of Christ and of the descent of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles, events which both happened on a Sunday, this duty became the Sunday precept as we know it today, characterized in particular by the duty of attendance at Mass.

    But in our days we witness a multiplicity of Masses, all different one from the other, old or Tridentine, new or Conciliar, in traditional liturgical language or in the vernacular, for the young, for the handicapped, etc., etc.

    In order to see a little more clearly on the subject of our Sunday duties today, let us first look at what the precept of Sunday Mass consists of, so as to examine subsequently the particular cases which are the attendance at the New Mass called that of "Pope Paul VI" and at the Mass called "with Indult."

    The Sunday precept in general

    From the beginning of the Christian era, it was the norm to sanctify feast days by the attendance at Mass. Why was this? To show by a public worship that we acknowledge the sovereignty of God over all things and, in consequence, our total dependence on Him. Such a duty was, however, at first, of a customary character. It did not become obligatory until, the year 506 A.D. through a provision of the Council of Agde.[3] This decree of a particular council was later transformed by custom into a universal law. One satisfies the duty of attending Sunday Mass by a conscious participation[4] in the whole of the Sacrifice, it being understood that this same Mass is celebrated in the Catholic Rite. This precept binds "subgravi" (i.e. under pain of mortal sin) all those who have reached the age of reason, i.e., seven years old.[5] But one can be excused from attending Mass in the case of impossibility
    resulting from:

    • illness,

    • distance (estimated at about one hour's journey),

    • from the fear of grave inconvenience (e.g., the shame of a pregnant girl out of wedlock),

    • grave danger (e.g., traveling under dangerous conditions such as icy roads),

    • or from charity towards one's neighbors (e.g. a mother looking after her children), etc.
    The case of attending the New Mass called the "Conciliar Mass" or "of Paul VI"

    Following the directives and the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, a new Ordo Missae was promulgated by the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum on April 3, 1969. Composed with the help of Protestant ministers, it had as its aim "to do everything to facilitate our separated brethren (i.e., the Protestants and the Orthodox) on the way to union, by avoiding every stumbling block and displeasing thing."[6] Composed so as to be acceptable to everyone, by this same deed all specifically Catholic marks disappeared. But very quickly the faithful, the clergy and some bishops resisted this reform by denouncing it as dangerous for the Faith. Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci did not hesitate to write on this occasion, that "the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent."[7]

    Now what do we note in this reform of the Missal? The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the non-bloody renewal of the Sacrifice on Calvary has become a meal around a table, serving as a memorial, more nor less a simple narrative of the Last Supper on Holy Thursday. The worship of the real Eucharistic Presence has been diminished and is no longer signified, by the suppression of genuflections, by the precious lining of the sacred vessels, by the placing aside of the tabernacle, by the placing of communion in the hand while standing, etc. Finally, the priest, sole minister and acting in persona Christi, has become president and brother of the people of God, barely distinct from them in the distribution of the Eucharist and in the readings. A series of facts which demonstrate the Protestantization of this New Mass, a Mass which can be used by the Protestants themselves because "theologically this is possible."[8]

    Now, what about attending these new Masses? First of all, they constitute a danger to the faith of the faithful:

    one can... without any exaggeration say that most of these Masses are sacrilegious and that they impoverish all Faith by diminishing it. The taking away of the sacredness is such that this Mass risks losing its supernatural character, "its mystery of faith" to become no more than an act of natural religion.[9]​

    This truth is confirmed by the evidence of numerous priests who have said this New Mass as well as by the attitude of the faithful in general who attend it, Even occasionally, in whom one notices unfortunately a lack of the spirit of prayer and recollection. The danger is likewise increased through the sermons heard, by the bad example seen and by becoming accustomed to the sacrileges committed.

    The first consequence then is that attendance at such a Mass could become a sinful act for the Catholics warned of the danger.

    In the second place, attendance at the New Mass signifies in some way one's approval, particularly if one receives Communion. It is a point of Catholic doctrine, recognized moreover by other religions, that he who receives the offering made during a religious ceremony recognizes in some implicit way, by his participation, this same religious cult. It is because of this that Saint Paul declared on the subject of food offered to idols, to take care not to become an occasion of scandal for those who surround us.

    "Because if someone sees you, you who have knowledge, seated at a table in the idol's temple" (today we would say at the table of the Conciliar supper), "shall not his conscience, being weak, bring him" to attend and to receive communion at the New Mass.

    And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish for whom Christ hath died? Now when you sin thus against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.​

    That is why the attendance and communion at the New Mass leads others to do the same; this thus becomes an occasion of loss of faith for our neighbor, it would be better to stop forever from frequenting this New Mass.[10]

    In the same way, St. Thomas Aquinas adds, that he

    who receives the Sacrament from a doubtful minister (suspended, demoted, we may nowadays add dubious as to his intentions) sins for his part and does not receive the effect of the sacrament, unless excused through ignorance.[11]

    But whoever communicates with another who is in sin, becomes a sharer in his sin. Hence we read in II John that 'He says unto him, God speed you, communicates with his wicked words.[12]​

    Consequently, it is not lawful to receive communion from them, or to assist at their Mass.[13] Thus

    by refusing to hear the Masses of such priests, or to receive communion from them, we are not shunning God's sacraments; on the contrary, by so doing we are giving them honor.[13]​

    What practical consequence can we draw from this?

    These new Masses, not only cannot be the object of the obligation of the Sunday precept but one should apply, in their regard, the rules of moral theology and of Canon Law, which are those of supernatural prudence with regard to the participation or attendance, as an act perilous to our Faith or eventual sacrilege.[9]​

    This teaching demands on the part of the faithful an effort, sometimes very meritorious, of traveling long distances to come regularly or at least periodically to the Tridentine Mass. This also demands total abstention from attending at the New Mass; a passive attendance is tolerated for a serious reason "to render honor or for a polite obligation" (as for example for the marriage or funeral of a relative or friend), "as long as there is no peril of perversion and of scandal."[14]

    In any case, no authority can oblige us to put our faith in danger. The children who attend so-called "Catholic" schools are particularly exposed by the fact of their lack of foundation and of discernment. It would be better to stay at home on Sunday, to say the family rosary, to read in your missal the Mass of the day or to read a spiritual book (Catechism, Lives of the Saints, etc.) rather than to expose oneself to the disquiet and to the imperceptible but certain alteration of our Catholic Faith, a treasure so rare in our days.

    The case of attending the traditional Mass said under the "Indult"

    Despite all the efforts of the official hierarchy since 1969, a few bishops, many priests, and a great number of the faithful have remained attached to the two-thousand-year old traditional rite of Mass. Time passed but the problem remained. In order to resolve it, Pope John Paul II gave to the diocesan bishops the faculty of making use of an indult so as to allow priests to say and faithful to attend the Mass contained in the Roman Missal edited in 1962; the missal moreover used by the Society of St. Pius X. That was the indult promulgated by the Congregation for the Divine Worship on October 3, 1984,15 an indult we shall see hereafter, made unacceptable through the intention of its legislators and by the conditions of its application. The consecrations of June 30, 1988, occurring, Pope John Paul II made use of this with regards to the traditionalists.

    Now, what about attending a Tridentine Mass celebrated under the indult?

    First of all, it constitutes a danger for the faith of the faithful, a danger which comes from the priests themselves who are celebrating it. Because to obtain this indult from the official hierarchy, these priests must fulfill the following conditions:

    That it should be very clear that these priests have nothing to do with those who place in doubt... the doctrinal soundness of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI, in 1970 and that their position should be without any ambiguity and publicly known.[15]​

    Thus is it necessary that these priests prove publicly by their behavior, their words and writings, shorn of ambiguities, that they admit "the doctrinal soundness" of the New Mass. No question in any way whatsoever of criticizing the Protestant and definitely non-Catholic look of Pope Paul VI's New Mass.

    Cardinal Mayer, former president of Ecclesia Dei placed in charge of re-integrating the Traditionalists in the Conciliar Church, added the following condition: these same priests "can obtain" this indult "on the condition that they be in normal juridical standing with their bishops or religious superiors." 16 One remembers that dozens of priests have been unjustly put out of their churches or their religious houses for the simple fact of continuing to say without change the Tridentine Mass, except for a good number of those who were favored by certain circumstances (age, distance etc.). May we ask these indult favored priests at what cost or compromise with the integral Catholic Faith have they kept or obtained "normal legal relations" with the hierarchy? Compromise which, for example, could appear in the fact of giving hosts doubtfully consecrated during a previous conciliar Mass or even through the manner of celebrating the traditional Mass full of hesitations and mistakes, sometimes even cause of scandal.

    There is a danger too for the Faith, that comes from the proximity of the faithful who attend exclusively these indult Masses, because they also have to fulfill the conditions of not placing in doubt the "doctrinal soundness" of the New Mass.15 Characteristically, these type of faithful, unfortunately too often, are concerned with reconciling in thought and in action the truth with heresy, Tradition with the conciliar spirit.

    Secondly from the very nature of the indult: an indult is "a concession from the authority which dispenses its subjects from the obligation of keeping a law." 17 "The indult is an exception. It can always be withdrawn. It confirms the general rule" 18 which is the New Mass, the conciliar liturgy. Because, to use a special permission, is this not to recognize and legitimize ipso facto the general law, that is to say the legal suppression of the two thousand year-old traditional rite?

    Indeed, to obtain the indult of 1984, one must fulfill the following conditions:

    that it should be quite clear that those priests and those faithful have nothing to do with those who place in question the legitimacy of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.[15]​

    Furthermore "this concession... should be utilized without prejudice to the observance of the liturgical reform (of Pope Paul VI) in the life of ecclesiastical communities"[15] of the Conciliar Church.

    Therefore no question of them advertising for the universal usage of the Traditional Mass. They must be made to recognize that this Tridentine Mass was validly, legally and legitimately abrogated or forbidden. No question either or calling the worth, always actual, of the words of the Pope St. Pius V:

    by virtue of Our Apostolic authority We give and grant in perpetuity, that for the singing or the reading of Mass in any church whatsoever this Missal (that is to say, the Tridentine Mass), may be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may be freely and lawfully used.[19] [cf. this article for more on this topic: The legitimacy of Quo Primum today]​

    The third point to tackle is this: to attend the "indult" Mass is at least to approve implicitly and to encourage the work of the destruction of Catholic Tradition undertaken by the official hierarchy. To prove this assertion, let us look first of all at the intentions of some of those responsible, to see some precise facts.

    In the first place the intention of Pope John Paul II himself, using this indult to favor the winning over of "traditional Catholics" to conciliar Rome:

    The Holy See has granted... the faculty of using the liturgical books in use in 1962... It is very evident that, far from seeking to put a brake on the application of the reform (of the New Mass) undertaken after the Council (by Pope Paul VI), this concession is destined to facilitate the ecclesial communion (that is to say their reinstatement in the Conciliar Church) of people who feel themselves attached to these liturgical forms.[20]​

    What now of the intentions and hopes of Cardinal Mayer, former president of the Ecclesia Dei Commission? He said:

    There are grounds to hope that, with the concerted efforts on the part of all concerned a substantial number of priests and seminarians will find the strength to renounce a 'state of mind' which until now was full of prejudices, of accusations and of disinformation... We have good reason to believe that the charity with which the priests coming from Archbishop Lefebvre and returning into the Church will be received, will contribute greatly to the fulfillment of this hope that, following them, numerous faithful whom they had served up till then, would also return into the ecclesial communion (with the Conciliar Church) through their mediation. Sometimes a temporary solution may be necessary, such as allowing them the possibility of celebrating the Holy Mass[21] (of Pope St. Pius V).​

    In the hands of the official hierarchy, the Tridentine Mass serves therefore as a temporary means and bait to attract the traditional priests and people and to destroy at the same time the work of Catholic restoration, started by Archbishop Lefebvre, Bishop de Castro Mayer and their priests. Means and bait to attract the traditional Catholics now considered as schismatics because they are no longer considered as "being in communion" with the present-day Rome, of liberal and modernist tendency. It is to be further noted that the Commission Ecclesia Dei could be generous for a time in the concessions granted to priests - a question of making them bite at the bait. But if through their "mediation" more or less conscious, their faithful do not return into the conciliar fold, it is to be anticipated that they will be judged as useless instruments and will find themselves either in the obligation to fulfill other conditions to keep that permission, or even to simply see the aforesaid permission withdrawn.

    Let us now move on to some illustrating facts: having received the permission to celebrate the Tridentine Rite, the Fraternity of St. Peter now see themselves threatened to accept giving communion in the hand[22] and saying the Mass of 1965, 22 having already accepted by one of their superiors, "all the documents of the Vatican II Council."[23] Hundreds of priests, seminarians and faithful have been lured with the Tridentine Rite and now are made to forcibly return to the ranks and the spirit of the Council. This work of destruction continues by the approval of Indult Masses close to our important Mass centers... A good method to empty these last ones or at least to prevent them from developing.

    That is why, what can look like a concession is in reality merely a maneuver to separate from us the largest number of faithful possible. This is the perspective in which they seem to be always giving a little more and even going very far. We must absolutely convince our faithful that it is no more than a maneuver, that it is dangerous to put oneself into the hands of Conciliar bishops and modernist Rome. It is the greatest danger threatening our people. If we have struggled for twenty years to avoid the Conciliar errors, it was not in order, now, to put ourselves in the hands of those professing these errors.[18]​

    To attempt to restore the traditional Mass without considering the historical context of the crisis of the Faith is to become a blind instrument in the hands of the conciliar hierarchy.

    What final conclusion can we draw from all this?

    That the precept of attending Sunday Mass is obligatory for all Catholics who have reached the age of reason (seven years old) but that some may be excused particularly those who are only near Masses "of Pope Paul VI" or to traditional Masses said under the "Indult." Why? Firstly, because of the danger for the faith coming either from the priests who celebrate or from the faithful who attend them; secondly, legitimization is given to the new liturgy and finally an approval more or less implicit of the work of destruction of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Tradition.

    Footnotes
    1 Gen. 2: 2-3.
    2 Ex. 20 :8, Lev. 23 :3, Deut. 5 :15, Ex. 31 :14.

    3 Gratian: Dist. I De cons. c.3.
    4 Can. 1247 (1917 Code of Canon Law).

    5 Can. 12 (1917 Code of Canon Law).
    6 Fr. A. Bugnini: L'Osservatore Romano (Mar 19, 1965) in Documentation Catholique, Apr 4, 1965, No. 1445, p. 603.

    7 A Short Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae (also commonly known as The Ottaviani Intervention), TAN Books and Publishers, 1992.

    8 Declaration of the Protestant minister Max Thurian: La Croix, May 30, 1969; p. 10.
    9 Position of Archbishop Lefebvre on the New Mass and the Pope (Nov 8, 1979), Cor Unum, No. 4, Nov 1979, pp 3-9.

    10 This is strongly inspired by I Cor 8.
    11 Summa Theologica, III, Q. 64, A. 9.

    12 II John 11.
    13 Summa Theologica, III, Q. 82, A. 9.
    14 Can. 1258, 2 (CIC 1917).

    15 Indult of the Sacred Congregation of Divine Worship of Oct 3, 1984 in Fideliter, No. 42, Nov-Dec 1984, pp 18-19.
    16 30 Days, No. 6, June 1989, p. 48.

    17 F. Roberti, P. Palazzini, Dizionario di Theologia Morale, Ed. Studium, Roma, 1955, article "Indulto".
    18 Interview with Archbishop Lefebvre, Fideliter, No. 70, July-August 1989, pp 13-14.

    19 Bull Quo Primum Tempore of Pope Saint Pius V, July 14, 1570.
    20 Audience of Sept 28, 1990 to the Benedictine Monks of Le Barroux. L'Osservatore Romano (French edition), Oct 2, 1990, No. 40.

    21 Letter of Cardinal Mayer to Msgr. May, L'Homme Nouveau, March 19, 1989.
    22 Controverses, No. 42; Jan 1992, p. 3.

    23 Controverses, No. 37; Oct 1991, p. 4.



     
  3. Admin

    Admin Administrator Staff Member

    Reasons To Avoid The Motu Proprio Mass (And To Attend the Non-Indult Traditional Mass Instead)

    1. By attending a motu proprio Mass, a person implicitly shows that he accepts the new mass because the motu proprio Mass is allowed only under this condition.1 Here is a hypothetical example to illustrate the point: Suppose a rich man announced that he would distribute free food in the town plaza, but he invited the participation of only those persons who acknowledge that the devil is God. By his presence, while silently participating in this food giveaway, a person implicitly indicates his agreement that the devil is God.
    2. The motu proprio Mass is offered by priests who commit the sacrilege2 of offering the new mass.3 Would you attend the motu proprio

    For example,​
    Pope Benedict XVI wrote in his July 7, 2007 letter: “Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, also the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness.” And again: “[T]he new missal will certainly remain the ordinary form of the Roman rite ... on account of the juridical norms”.

    Further: “The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria ....” Para. 19, May 13, 2011 Instruction “Universae Ecclesiae” on the implementation of the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum.”

    Cardinal Camille Perl, Secretary of Ecclesia Dei Commision: “In the original document granting permission for the traditional Latin Mass, Quattuor abhinc annos of 3 October 1984, the Church made a condition for the concession of the use of the 1962 Roman Missal that one must not “call into question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.” While the other conditions required by that document have been modified in the light of the Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei of 2 July 1988, that first condition retains its full effect. Those who are unwilling to recognize the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the present Roman Missal are not entitled to the celebration of the so-called "Tridentine" Mass. This is a very serious and non-negotiable matter.” Quoted in: http://www.sspx.org/motu_proprio/legitimacy_of_quo_primum_today.htm

    2. A “sacrilege” is the “irreverent treatment of the sacred”. Summa, IIa IIae, Q.99, a.1. This definition certainly fits the new mass because it is inherently harmful to souls and to the Catholic Faith.

    3. See, e.g., Pope Benedict XVI's July 7, 2007 apostolic letter, Summorum Pontificum, 1
    Art. 2, requiring use of the new mass on some days.

    Mass offered by a priest who also offers a Black Mass? If not, then why accept a priest who ever offers the sacrilegious new mass?​
    1. The motu proprio Mass is offered only by priests who refuse to condemn the worst religious errors infecting the Church in our times. If the Catholics of the Fourth Century were right to follow St. Athanasius and avoid priests who refused to condemn Arianism (even though they offered the very same Mass), then we should not attend motu proprio Masses, which are offered only by priests who refuse to condemn the main religious errors infecting the Church in our times!

    2. If a person attends a motu proprio Mass in a church that is also used for the new mass, then he willingly uses for worship, a place which is also set aside for the commission of sacrilege. A place used for sacrilege is far more unfitting for Divine worship than a “neutral” place not set aside for Divine worship.

    3. By attending a Mass set up under the pope’s 7-7-07 motu proprio, a person implicitly affirms the falsehood that the pope’s motu proprio (or the 1984 or 1988 indults) is/was needed for the traditional Mass.

    4. When the traditional Mass and the new mass are both offered in one church, people entering that church for the traditional Mass will give the impression that they also attend the new mass, because it is reasonably foreseeable that they will be seen entering the church by persons who will not take note of the time of entry. (This foreseeable scandal is similar to that caused by persons attending an innocent bingo game in a location shared with a business offering pornographic entertainment, even if the bingo game occurs at a time when that porn entertainment is not offered.)

    5. For hosts not consecrated at that particular motu proprio Mass, it might be unknown if they are valid and whether their consecration occurred in a sacrilegious new mass.

    6. The priests offering the motu proprio Mass come from the conciliar church. Their ordinations might be doubtful.

    7. By attending a motu proprio Mass (the “extraordinary form”), a person implicitly shows that he accepts the new mass (the “ordinary” form) as good. The new mass cannot be the “ordinary” option (or even an option at all), unless it is good.
    2

    1. Attending the motu proprio Mass cuts you off from the uncompromising doctrine and sermons of heroic traditional priests who offer the non-motu proprio Masses.

    2. Attending the motu proprio Mass causes the gradual tendency to go to the motu proprio priests for the new rite of confession and other new sacraments (each of which has conciliar “taint” and other serious problems).

    3. Attending the motu proprio Mass makes other conciliar compromises easier and more likely, e.g., recitation of the “Luminous” mysteries of the rosary.

    4. Attending the motu proprio Mass makes you comfortable with other aspects of the novus ordo milieu, e.g., conciliar church architecture, with a detached tabernacle and a Protestant/conciliar table instead of an altar, to emphasize the mass as a meal (as Luther and Cranmer did).

    5. Attending the motu proprio Mass causes a gradual tendency to view the motu proprio priests as a source of good advice. Thus, you will get advice from priests who consider the new mass and Vatican II to be
      good and consider uncompromising traditional Catholics to be in schism.

    6. Donating money at a motu proprio Mass financially promotes harmful conciliar causes. Even when your donations are stated to be for a particular unobjectionable cause (such as paying for a new roof on the church), such donations still indirectly promote harmful causes because your donations free up other money to be used to promote those harmful causes. (This indirect effect is similar to donating money to a Protestant organization which both teaches classes in Protestantism and also teaches cooking classes. If you donate money with the stipulation that your money be used only for cooking classes, your donation merely frees up other money to be used to teach Protestantism.)

    7. When one attends the motu proprio Mass, he fails to give his moral and financial support to non-motu proprio priests who are courageously fighting for Catholic tradition. You advance the conciliar goal of siphoning-off support from those uncompromising priests.

    8. Priests offering the motu proprio Mass are often so far from a Catholic mindset that they often prefer the new mass and offer the motu proprio Mass only because they are assigned to do so.
    3

    1. Attending the motu proprio Mass will affect who you associate with (and, if you are looking for a spouse, will affect who you marry). All of us need the help of strong Catholic friends, to aid us in living the traditional Catholic life more fully. If you attend the motu proprio Mass, your friends (and future spouse) will have the motu proprio mindset, of accepting the new mass as good, accepting the conciliar teachings as true, and rejecting the uncompromising (non-motu proprio) traditional Mass, traditional Faith and traditional Sacraments. The influences upon you will be motu proprio friends at a conciliar parish.

    2. Attending the motu proprio Mass is to knowingly walking into a trap set by (and candidly disclosed by) the conciliar Catholic hierarchy. The pope and cardinals have clearly said that they continue on the course of post-conciliar errors and that these motu proprio Masses are designed to integrate traditional Catholics into the conciliar church. See, e.g., http://www.zenit.org/article-32593?l=english (Vatican calling the traditional Mass an “ecumenical bridge” and outlining the plan for using it as a step to blending the new mass and the traditional Mass) & http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1101922.htm.

      As Pope John Paul II admitted: “The Holy See has granted... the faculty of using the liturgical books in use in 1962... It is very evident that, far from seeking to put a brake on the application of the reform undertaken after the Council, this concession is destined to facilitate the ecclesial communion of people who feel themselves attached to these liturgical forms.” Audience of Sept 28, 1990 to the Benedictine Monks of Le Barroux. L'Osservatore Romano (French edition), Oct 2, 1990, No. 40 (emphasis added).

      As admitted by Cardinal Mayer, former president of the Ecclesia Dei Commission: “There are grounds to hope that, with the concerted efforts on the part of all concerned a substantial number of priests and seminarians will find the strength to renounce a 'state of mind' which until now was full of prejudices, of accusations and of disinformation... We have good reason to believe that the charity with which the priests coming from Archbishop Lefebvre and returning into the Church will be received, will contribute greatly to the fulfillment of this hope that, following them, numerous faithful whom they had served up till then, would also return into the ecclesial communion (with the Conciliar Church) through their mediation. Sometimes a temporary solution may be necessary, such as allowing them the possibility of celebrating the Holy Mass [of Pope St. Pius V].” See, Letter of Cardinal Mayer to Msgr. May, L'Homme Nouveau, March
    4
    1. Attending the motu proprio Mass will affect who you associate with (and, if you are looking for a spouse, will affect who you marry). All of us need the help of strong Catholic friends, to aid us in living the traditional Catholic life more fully. If you attend the motu proprio Mass, your friends (and future spouse) will have the motu proprio mindset, of accepting the new mass as good, accepting the conciliar teachings as true, and rejecting the uncompromising (non-motu proprio) traditional Mass, traditional Faith and traditional Sacraments. The influences upon you will be motu proprio friends at a conciliar parish.

    2. Attending the motu proprio Mass is to knowingly walking into a trap set by (and candidly disclosed by) the conciliar Catholic hierarchy. The pope and cardinals have clearly said that they continue on the course of post-conciliar errors and that these motu proprio Masses are designed to integrate traditional Catholics into the conciliar church. See, e.g., http://www.zenit.org/article-32593?l=english (Vatican calling the traditional Mass an “ecumenical bridge” and outlining the plan for using it as a step to blending the new mass and the traditional Mass) & http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1101922.htm.

      As Pope John Paul II admitted: “The Holy See has granted... the faculty of using the liturgical books in use in 1962... It is very evident that, far from seeking to put a brake on the application of the reform undertaken after the Council, this concession is destined to facilitate the ecclesial communion of people who feel themselves attached to these liturgical forms.” Audience of Sept 28, 1990 to the Benedictine Monks of Le Barroux. L'Osservatore Romano (French edition), Oct 2, 1990, No. 40 (emphasis added).

      As admitted by Cardinal Mayer, former president of the Ecclesia Dei Commission: “There are grounds to hope that, with the concerted efforts on the part of all concerned a substantial number of priests and seminarians will find the strength to renounce a 'state of mind' which until now was full of prejudices, of accusations and of disinformation... We have good reason to believe that the charity with which the priests coming from Archbishop Lefebvre and returning into the Church will be received, will contribute greatly to the fulfillment of this hope that, following them, numerous faithful whom they had served up till then, would also return into the ecclesial communion (with the Conciliar Church) through their mediation. Sometimes a temporary solution may be necessary, such as allowing them the possibility of celebrating the Holy Mass [of Pope St. Pius V].” See, Letter of Cardinal Mayer to Msgr. May, L'Homme Nouveau, March

    5

    19, 1989 (emphasis added), quoted at: http://www.sspx.org/motu_proprio/attendance_at_the_indult_vanes.htm.

    Thus, when traditional Catholics choose a motu proprio Mass, they knowingly accept the conciliar hierarchy’s bait and assume they will be able to discern and reject the accompanying conciliar poison. This is like a person knowingly eating pieces of a poisoned apple pie because he assumes that he will never fail to recognize (and avoid) the poison. By attending the motu proprio Mass, one is wagering his eternal salvation that he can outsmart the conciliar Catholic hierarchy, in his discernment.

    Advice of two authorities:

    Archbishop Lefebvre wisely warned that it is better to go to no Mass than attend or support such an approved Latin Mass. See, Fr. Peter Scott’s Angelus Magazine Q & A, ¶6, “What's Wrong With The Latin Masses Approved By The Bishop?”

    “The motu proprio Mass, like the indult Mass, is therefore not for traditional Catholics.” See, Fr. Peter Scott Q & A “Can the faithful assist at the traditional Masses celebrated in virtue of the Motu proprio of Pope Benedict XVI of July 7, 2007?”

    ..
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 6, 2018
    mirella likes this.