Canned Answers to Stale Objections
IF YOUR
parish priest says that you cannot attend Mass or receive the sacraments
according to the “received and approved” rites
of the Roman Catholic Church at Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission
because:
·
1) Our bishop does not approve!
Reply:
Why is the
bishop’s “approval” necessary in this case?
Every Catholic without exception is morally obligated on pain of sin to
properly inform his conscience and then obey it. That is exactly what the members of Ss. Peter
& Paul Roman Catholic Mission have done.
The members have presented a question of conscience on matters of
Catholic Faith and Morals regarding their rights to the “received and approved” immemorial traditions of our Church to our
local bishop and to the authorities in Rome.
This was done over ten years ago and since then,
the petition has been repeated to our local bishop on numerous occasions as
clearly documented on the Mission’s Open Letter web page. The local bishop and the authorities in Rome
have not addressed the matter. Bishop
Kevin Rhoades specifically said, “I do not intend to submit your request to Rome, nor do I have plans
to initiate a judicial process.” Aside from the fact that this constitutes a
grave and callous dereliction of duty, it also permits freedom of action on the
part of the Mission and its members. As
St. Thomas More said in his dramatic trial, “The maxim is ‘Qui tacet consentiret’: the maxim of
the law is ‘Silence gives consent.’” The
failure of Rome to authoritatively address this matter of conscience that
pertains directly to Catholic Faith and Morals permits the assumption of
approval until the Pope, from the chair of Peter, rules otherwise. Again, it bears repeating, every Catholic, on
the pain of grave sin, is morally obliged to form a true and certain
conscience, and then to follow it.
·
2) They are a group in schism from the Catholic
Church!
Reply:
Are
they? Then why do they pray for the Pope
and the local bishop by name in the Rosary recited daily in their chapel? Why do they pray for the Pope and the local
bishop in every Mass offered in their chapel?
Schism is defined as failure to hold communion with the Pope in Rome or with
those in communion with him. If it is
true that the members of Ss. Peter & Paul have failed to hold communion
with the local bishop and the pope, why have they formally petitioned for their
official judgment regarding matters of Faith and Morals? The Masses offered at Ss. Peter & Paul
Roman Catholic Mission are open to the public. Since you are advising Catholics not to
attend their Masses, are you refusing “communion” with them? Who then is guilty of “schism”?
·
3) They teach doctrines contrary to the Catholic
Church!
Reply:
Do
they? Please document exactly what
Catholic doctrines they do not hold or teach contrary to the Catholic
faith? Also please explain why you, or
anyone else from the local chancery, have failed over the last ten years to
produce any specific charge of heresy?
Why have you failed to meet their public challenge for an open written
exchange on this charge?
·
4) Their Masses are valid but illicit!
Reply:
This is
another way of saying the “bishop does not approve.” See reply to objection #1. The Mission has provided, as they are morally
obligated to do, a public explanation on a matter of conscience for their
failure to conform with specific canons of the
Catholic Church. They have done all that
is required of them canonically and morally to do. Why hasn’t the local bishop done the same?
Fr. Paul
Kramer explains:
The Tridentine Profession of Faith of Pope Pius IV, Iniunctum Nobis,
prescribes adherence to the “received and approved
rites of the Catholic Church used in the solemn administration of the
sacraments.” The “received and approved rites” are the rites
established by custom, and hence the Council of Trent refers to them as the “received and approved rites of the Catholic Church
customarily used in the solemn administration of the sacraments” (Sess. VII,
can XIII). Adherence to the
customary rites received and approved by the Church is an infallible defined
doctrine: The Council of Florence defined that “priests….
must confect the body of the Lord, each one according to the custom of his
Church” (Decretum pro Graecis),
and therefore the Council of Trent solemnly condemned as heresy the
proposition that “ the received and approved rites of
the Catholic Church customarily used in the solemn administration of the
sacraments may be changed into other new rites by any ecclesiastical pastor
whosoever.”
Fr. Paul
Kramer, The Suicide of Altering the Faith in the
Liturgy
Regarding
these “received and approved” rite, Pope St.
Pius V declared in Quo Primum that:
“…this
missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of
conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may
freely and lawfully be used… Nor are superiors, administrators, canons,
chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title
designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. …
Accordingly, no one whatsoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene
this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance,
command, precept, grant, direction, will, decree and prohibition. Should any person venture to do so, let him
understand he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles
Peter and Paul.”
Pope St.
Pius V, Papal Bull, QUO PRIMUM,
Tridentine Codification of the traditional Roman Rite
of the Mass.
In light of
the above quotation, please explain how a Catholic priest offering and the
faithful attending the immemorial Roman rite of Mass can be made an “illicit”
act?
·
5) Attending their Masses does not fulfill your
Sunday obligation.
Reply:
This
question has already been addressed by authorities in Rome. Their answer has been provided to the local
bishop and his judicial vicar by Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission,
yet, this objection is mindlessly repeated.
Is that because it is useful to bully the uninformed? And what good Catholic would suspect their
local pastors to lie to them? The
following reply was communicated to the local ordinary seven years ago.
Rev. Msgr. Camille Perl, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission of Ecclesia Dei and no friend of Catholic tradition, wrote a private letter on September 27, 2002 that was published in part in the Remnant. Msgr. Perl wrote a follow up public letter on January 18, 2003 that was intended to provide further clarification of the private letter written in September. In the letter of January 20, 2003 Msgr. Perl said:
“In response to the question, Points 1 and 3 in our letter of 27 September 2002 to this correspondent are accurately reported. His first question was "Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation by attending a Pius X Mass" and our response was:
"1.
In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass
celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X."
Msgr. Perl’s reply
is fully in accord with the canons of the Catholic Church.
Can. 923 The Christian faithful
can participate in the eucharistic
sacrifice and receive holy communion in any Catholic rite, without prejudice to
the prescript of can. 844.
Can. 844 §2.
Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and
provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian
faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic
minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and
anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these
sacraments are valid.
Can. 1248 §1.
A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on
the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the
obligation of participating in the Mass.
·
6) Their confessions are not valid!
Reply:
And why not?
Can. 844 §2.
Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and
provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian
faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic
minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and
anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these
sacraments are valid.
It
is the individual Catholic who is authorized to designate the priest for whom
the Church supplies jurisdiction to validly administer the sacrament of penance
because it is the individual Catholic who selects the priest to hear his
confession and determines the criteria that make it “physically
or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister.” If any Catholic can go to confession to a
non-Catholic priest, a fortiori, he
can do so with any Catholic priest in cases where a “true
spiritual advantage suggests it” because, with a Catholic priest who
follows the “received and approved” immemorial
traditions, there is no “danger of error or of
indifferentism.”
And
what might be the grounds for “moral impossibility”? How many priests in this diocese have
informed the Catholics in their parishes that the use of artificial birth
control is a grave sin? How many priests
in this diocese have informed their parishioners that the Church infallibly
teaches that there is “no salvation outside the Catholic Church”? There are many like examples that can be
provided. Can you offer any serious
objection to Catholics who chooses a confessor that will not lead them or their
children into doctrinal or moral error?
·
7) You
can attend a locally approved Latin Mass instead!
Reply:
The
locally approved Latin Masses are a legal concession granted firstly as an
Indult and then as a grant of privilege under Summorum Pontificum. They are not the immemorial Roman rite of
Mass but rather the Extraordinary Form of the Novus Ordo,
the Msgr. Anibale Bugnini
reform Missal of 1962. The immemorial
traditions of the Latin rite are not, nor could ever be, the subject of an
“indult” which is the permission to do something forbidden by human law. The question is: Can human law make the
immemorial worship of God illegal? Ss.
Peter & Paul claims that no one possesses the authority to make the worship
of God illegal. All they are asking is
for the Pope to authoritatively declare whether or not he, as the Pope,
possesses the authority to make the immemorial traditions of the Roman rite
illegal and forbid them to the Catholic faithful. Pope Benedict in the past has said that the
pope does not possess such authority:
“After the Second Vatican Council, the
impression arose that the pope really could do anything in liturgical matters,
especially if he were acting on the mandate of an ecumenical council.
Eventually, the idea of the givenness of the liturgy,
the fact that one cannot do with it what one will, faded from the public
consciousness of the West. In fact, the First Vatican Council had in no way
defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the
contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word.
The pope's authority is bound to the Tradition of faith, and that also applies
to the liturgy. It is not "manufactured" by the authorities. Even the
pope can only be a humble servant of its lawful development and abiding
integrity and identity. . . . The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is
at the service of Sacred Tradition.”
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger,
Spirit of the Liturgy
Another
problem with the Extraordinary Form of the Novus Ordo,
the 1962 Missal, is that it is only exercised as a grant of privilege which can
be revoked by the free and independent will of the legislator. Permission has been granted in this diocese
on the condition of silence to sin. Our
former ordinary, Bishop Kevin Rhoades, gave the cathedral Church, St. Patrick,
to the Lutherans for the installation ceremony of their “bishop.” This grave
sacrilege was met by mute silence by the indult crowd lest they should lose
their favor. He also vetted the sermons
at the Indult Masses for conformity with the new orthodoxy and censored priests
that did not conform. When he told a
public gathering of Jews that the ‘Church did not seek their conversion to the
Catholic faith,’ again there was not a word of objection raised by the Indult
community. Ss. Peter & Paul Roman
Catholic Mission affirms that the right of Catholics to worship God according
to the immemorial traditions of our Church cannot be conditionally exercised at
the price of accommodating doctrinal or
moral error.
·
8) They are dangerous!
Reply:
This
of course is true. The truth is always
“dangerous.” Once exposed to the truth things are never the same. If you turn away from truth, you turn away
from God.
In
fine, Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission claims that Catholics, by
virtue of their baptismal character, have a duty imposed by God to profess
their Catholic Faith in both the internal and external forum. They claim that the duty, imposed by God, to
publically profess their faith creates a right to the immemorial traditions of
the Church which are the perfect outward expression of the internal faith that
they must necessarily hold if they are to save their souls. They further claim that this right cannot be
conditionally exercised at the price of compromising Catholic Faith or
Morals. They are awaiting Pope Benedict’s
authoritative judgment on this claim and they expect their local ordinary, as a
matter of grave duty imposed by his office, to do his part to expedite this
matter with Pope Benedict XVI.