|
Post by wenceslav on Oct 12, 2017 6:48:39 GMT -5
Hi Vox
I can relate my own example and others if you desire. In the same parish I was married in i.e. the Nativity of the Mother of God (Byzantine Shaw Street Toronto ) , my parish priest Mons. Cajka changed the words of institution (many to all) due to directives from the Presov (Prjashiv) Eparchy Slovakia and approved by a Mons. Pazak now head of the Eparchy of Phoenix, I believe. .I respectfully showed him copies of documents of how this may invalidate the mass or least doubtful validity - some were from the Patrick Ormlor and some from SSPX. At first he was receptive but after talking to his superiors he became quite hostile. He asked me if I was SSPX, I couldn’t lie becaus I did attend mass there on occasion. He informed me that I would have to purge myself of my SSPX error and my insistence on the Traditional form for the reception of Holy Communion. At that point I was ready to leave because I was attending an invalid Mass anyway. So there you go.
Sorry , I just realized this is a Byz. Example. I can give you a Ukr. Example(s) as well if you desire.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 12, 2017 8:19:05 GMT -5
Hi Vox I can relate my own example and others if you desire. In the same parish I was married in i.e. the Nativity of the Mother of God (Byzantine Shaw Street Toronto ) , my parish priest Mons. Cajka changed the words of institution (many to all) due to directives from the Presov (Prjashiv) Eparchy Slovakia and approved by a Mons. Pazak now head of the Eparchy of Phoenix, I believe. .I respectfully showed him copies of documents of how this may invalidate the mass or least doubtful validity - some were from the Patrick Ormlor and some from SSPX. At first he was receptive but after talking to his superiors he became quite hostile. He asked me if I was SSPX, I couldn’t lie becaus I did attend mass there on occasion. He informed me that I would have to purge myself of my SSPX error and my insistence on the Traditional form for the reception of Holy Communion. At that point I was ready to leave because I was attending an invalid Mass anyway. So there you go. Sorry , I just realized this is a Byz. Example. I can give you a Ukr. Example(s) as well if you desire. Im sure you can but as Pacelli has continually pointed out...these are case by case issues...your comment was a blanket statement which is not at all true.There are many crypto SSj members in the ukrainian priesthood...they have zero love for ducks
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 12, 2017 8:20:44 GMT -5
What makes cmri any less dubious if you take into account the validity issues of their priests and bishops. I really in the end cant see Our Merciful Lord holding the laity accountable...Im no pollyanna but My God isnt a legalistic monster. Now the clergy on the other hand should be trembling in their boots What validity issues? Can you be more specific? Along the lines of the Thuc controversies and the "being sent"...
|
|
|
Post by wenceslav on Oct 12, 2017 10:50:42 GMT -5
Hi Vox,
Try the Lviv Arch-Eparchy for the Ukrainians. The largest demographically, If you support the Society of St. Josaphat or the SSPX, you are in schism and refused Communion (at least officially).
And Vox, I would like to ask you the same hypothetical question as I asked Pacelli.
If you only had access to a SSPX or SSPV and the closest Divine Liturgy was inaccessible and you had to make your Easter duty, Holy Confession and Communion, (but not in the danger of death) would you attend the “Traditionalist” venue.
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 12, 2017 11:22:38 GMT -5
As a peasant Catholic I have no qualms about the Eastern rite or the CMRI SSPX etc.....I would go to any of them ...Im not a handwringer like many of you (with all due respect)...I trust God is wholly just and merciful...and if individual Catholics are doing everything in their feeble human powers to love worship and obey Him and His Church I just dont see Him punishing on technicalities.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 12, 2017 11:24:37 GMT -5
This is my number one beef with all ya Roman Trads...your so into your minutiae...you miss the big picture.
|
|
|
Post by wenceslav on Oct 12, 2017 11:41:47 GMT -5
Sorry you feel that way Vox. I’m technically an Easterner though. But if I didn’t care about minutiae or technicality like say for - the words of institution, I would be going to an invalid Mass. as did probably about 125000 Byzantines in Slovakia. Yes God gave me a brain, beyond that I pray for his Mercy.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 12, 2017 12:17:09 GMT -5
Wenceslav wrote:
Some of the list below apply to all traditionalist groups, while others apply only to some. I can assure you that all of the following are public, and in my opinion, common knowledge. Please let me know if you don't agree, which numbered statement you are not sure about, and need additional proof.
1. Denial of Holy Communion for not adhering to the group's non-authoritative opinions: going to chapels/priests not approved by the group. 2. Strongly encouraging collections/donations, and at a minimum at least giving the appearance that the precept of the Church is fulfilled by donating to the chapel/priest/group. 3. Make determinations regarding God-parents, deciding some can't be selected since the person goes to an unapproved chapel/priest. 4. Forcing people to sign statements about issues regarding the crisis, at the risk of loss of the sacraments. 5. Annulments 6. Give de facto imprimaturs on books. 7. Consecrating and establishing churches. 8. Imposing a calendar, rubrics or rites contrary to the current laws of the Catholic Church, and binding priests of the group to adhere to the group's decisions on such matters. 9. Unauthorized Exorcisms 10. Preach unauthorized sermons. 11. Establish and operate schools. 12. Start new religious orders. 13. Hearing vows of religious. 14. Dispensing from obligations. 15. Writing and publishing unapproved catechisms. 16. Establishing and operating a seminary. 17. Use titles or authority that only can be given by the Church, i.e. Pastor, rector, superior general, etc. 18. Use symbols of authority: pallium, pectoral cross, wearing episcopal ring and allowing laity to kiss the ring, crozier, fixed thrones. (Some may argue that some of these symbols are required in the Liturgy. While I concede that, the liturgy was based on authorized bishops performing the rite, that is not the case with these bishops. At the very least, I believe, in order to avoid confusion, that these traditional bishops should explain the situation, so the laity will not mistake them for lawful and legitimate bishops.)
Note: this is not a comprehensive list, more can be added.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 12, 2017 12:59:28 GMT -5
Wenceslav wrote: The question is too narrow for me to answer. I regularly confess to lawful Roman Rite clergy, those ordained and sent by the Church, and given authorization (jurisdiction) to hear confessions. I would also confess to lawfully sent eastern rite clerics, not necessarily just Ukrainian, but any of the eastern rites. I do not confess to traditionalists, but would do so if I was not able to foresee finding an approved confessor for a very long time, using the principle explained HERE. I am fortunate that I know of some elderly Roman rite priests who are able to hear my confession. I am not certain that the Easter duty applies in our situation, at least in the Roman rite. The Church does not command us to request the sacraments from priests under censure. The underlying principle of the precept is that we would go to lawful local clergy to fulfill it. With that said, I would go to traditionalist priests for mass, and do so on occasion. I am not delusional about who they are, and I am not willing to go to just any of them. The more they seek to impose unlawful authority, the more I will avoid them. Regarding your posts from Mr. Lane and the Bellarmine Forums, I am not in disagreement with it. While I believe the traditionalist bishops and priests should not exist, the fact is that they do, and I believe canons 2261 and 2284, permit the faithful to request the sacraments from such priests. I do not, however believe we have any obligation to request the sacraments from such priests, but may do so if it is prudent.
|
|
|
Post by wenceslav on Oct 12, 2017 13:02:03 GMT -5
I really do thank you for your time and effort. And in normal times, with a true Pope in the Vatican any group that would commit the above transgressions against (mostly?)ecclesiastical law would have been shunned, deemed schismatic etc. There is a good article by Fr. Cekada at URL: www.cmri.org/02-tradpriests.html. I believe John Lane liked it as well except for a minor flaw somewhere. (have to check). Please read the article if you like (you probably already have). It sums up the reasoning (i think sound and Catholic) behind many of the points you posted above. I also think it would redundant to post anything against the conciliar Ukrainian Church (a similar list) because I have discussed it already.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Oct 12, 2017 13:09:48 GMT -5
Wenceslav wrote: The question is too narrow for me to answer. I regularly confess to lawful Roman Rite clergy, those ordained and sent by the Church, and given authorization (jurisdiction) to hear confessions. I would also confess to lawfully sent eastern rite clerics, not necessarily just Ukrainian, but any of the eastern rites. I do not confess to traditionalists, but would do so if I was not able to foresee finding an approved confessor for a very long time, using the principle explained HERE. I am fortunate that I know of some elederly Roman rite priests who are able to hear my confession. I am not certain that the Easter duty applies in our situation, at least in the Roman rite. The Church does not command us to request the sacraments from priests under censure. The underlying principle of the precept is that we would go to lawful local clergy to fulfill it. With that said, I would go to traditionalist priests for mass, and do so on occasion. I am not delusional about who they are, and I am not willing to go to just any of them. The more they seek to impose unlawful authority, the more I will avoid them. Regarding your posts from Mr. Lane and the Bellarmine Forums, I am not in disagreement with it. While I believe the traditionalist bishops and priests should not exist, the fact is that they do, and I believe canons 2261 and 2284, permit the faithful to request the sacraments from such priests. I do not, however believe we have any obligation to request the sacraments from such priests, but may do so if it is prudent. What?! Wait?! You are like THE worst Home Aloner ever.
|
|
|
Post by wenceslav on Oct 12, 2017 13:46:21 GMT -5
For what its worth, I cringe at a Liturgy changed by the Modernists with its introduced disciplines (to please the schismatics) and commemoration of heretics as saints under the false guise of returning to a foggy past pre-schism. I worry about the Modernist infiltration into the Ukrainian catechism and Canon Law. And I'm utterly dismayed that the Ukrainian Hierarchy has approved a heretical document "Their Ecumenism Plan". I am sure you are as well. For the spiritual welfare of my family, I could not attend a Ukr/Byz Liturgy except in the case of the danger of imminent death.
If there is a Hierarch in the Ukrainian Church who is Catholic (and there may be and I hope there is) it will be in spite of the above.
Beyond that I think I have presented my case as best as I can. I wish John Lane could chime in.
thanks for all your effort and commentary
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 12, 2017 14:32:49 GMT -5
Since the thread (Teplota and Validity) has gone off onto another topic, I have split it, and moved most of it here.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 12, 2017 16:23:57 GMT -5
Sorry you feel that way Vox. I’m technically an Easterner though. But if I didn’t care about minutiae or technicality like say for - the words of institution, I would be going to an invalid Mass. as did probably about 125000 Byzantines in Slovakia. Yes God gave me a brain, beyond that I pray for his Mercy. The words of consecration are not minutiae. But adding a drip of hot water to the chalice...and having an ill intentiined hierarchy dont grant permission to make blanket condemnations. You have not addressed that btw.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 12, 2017 16:24:40 GMT -5
I have not been denied sacraments for my sede stand.
|
|