« Singing in Savannah | Main | Remember the Dawkins/Quinn debate? »
October 23, 2006
When Catholic isn't
(I'd like to know if any other diocesan papers have done something like this. It strikes me as a useful thing, but I suspect the general attitude is, "We'll just pretend they don't exist.")
It's a pretty good article, but I think it would be helped by a bit more clarity: a graphic, perhaps - the churches/chapels described are listed, but the listing would be improved by a simple association with each name. Instead you have to search through the article to try to make sense of it and keep them all straight. A little more historical background on each group would clarify things as well.
I'm sure that SSPX adherents will argue about this, though:
Picture this scenario. You’re unable to attend Sunday Mass over the weekend at your home parish, yet you spot a quaint chapel in Mukwonago called St. Pius V Chapel offering “Catholic Mass” at a convenient time.
If you attend the service conducted in Latin in the Tridentine rite by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X, would you have fulfilled your Sunday Mass obligation?
According to Zabrina Decker, vice chancellor of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, the answer is no.
St. Pius V Chapel is one of a handful of groups or places within the geographic boundaries of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee that, according to a recent chancery newsletter, “use the title ‘Catholic,’ or describe services in a way that could lead to that identification,” yet are not recognized as Catholic by the Milwaukee Archdiocese.
I'm sure it will also irk some to have the SSPX tossed into the same article as this group:
According to Baiocchi, Jesus Our Shepherd community began in May 2001 “as a Eucharist-centered faith community” at the request of Catholic people living in the Nenno area left churchless by the closing and sale of SS. Peter and Paul.
“We call ourselves an inclusive Catholic Church. We consider ourselves to be an inclusive branch of the Roman Catholic Church. We welcome people whose spiritual needs are not being met by other churches or congregations,” he said, adding most of the 60 to 90 people who attend regular Sunday services are people — not just Catholics — who have been hurt by religion.
He said the church offers a full range of ministries, including baptisms, weddings, first Communions, confirmations, anointings, memorial services and burial of the dead.
...as well as the Old Catholic Church of America.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
If you attend the service conducted in Latin in the Tridentine rite by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X, would you have fulfilled your Sunday Mass obligation?
According to Zabrina Decker, vice chancellor of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, the answer is no.
Is this correct? I've never actually done this and, thank God, don't fell any temptations to do this; but if the Mass is valid (although illicit) wouldn't that fulfill the obligation. What if someone did this quite innocently?
Posted by: Catherine L at Oct 23, 2006 2:07:55 PM
Even Rome says that you can attend an SSPX Mass to fulfill one's Sunday obligation.
They (The Chancery Beaurocrats) would rather you not, because they're trying to push what amounts to a new religion, and the SSPX insists on being Catholic by believing the dogmas, and using the means, that all the canonized saints used.
If you need exact documentation for that, I'm sure someone on here can oblige. I don't have it handy at the moment.
Moreover, I would not be surprised is some of the Masses...excuse me..Liturgies..in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee are INVALID..given Archbishop Weaklands reign over the diocese for such a long time.
Posted by: Matthew at Oct 23, 2006 2:29:32 PM
"the church offers a full range of ministries..."
Gotta love the phrasing. "Our catering company offers a full line of services..."
Posted by: lickona at Oct 23, 2006 2:37:38 PM
I always thought that the way you tell Catholics from non-Catholics is that the former acknowledge the authority of the local bishop, whereas the latter do not.
This does put SSPX, weird liberals, Wicca, and a whole host of other folks in the same basket. Rightly so.
They (The Chancery Beaurocrats) would rather you not, because they're trying to push what amounts to a new religion.
If by "the chancery bureaucrats" you mean the bishops, I'm afraid you're in that basket too, Matthew.
Posted by: Adam at Oct 23, 2006 2:50:08 PM
So you can take the opinion of the Vice-chancellor of Milwaukee or you can go with the opinion of Rome:
Letter by Msgr. Camille Perl Regarding Society of St. Pius X Masses
Una Voce America has received a communication from the Pontifical Ecclesia Dei Commission, concerning an article which appeared in The Remnant newspaper and various websites. At the request of the Commission, we are publishing it below.
Pontificia Commissio "Ecclesia Dei" January 18, 2003
Greetings in the Hearts of Jesus & Mary! There have been several inquiries about our letter of 27 September 2002. In order to clarify things, Msgr. Perl has made the following response.
Oremus pro invicem.
In cordibus Jesu et Mariæ,
Msgr. Arthur B. Calkins
Msgr. Camille Perl's response:
Unfortunately, as you will understand, we have no way of controlling what is done with our letters by their recipients. Our letter of 27 September 2002, which was evidently cited in The Remnant and on various websites, was intended as a private communication dealing with the specific circumstances of the person who wrote to us. What was presented in the public forum is an abbreviated version of that letter which omits much of our pastoral counsel. Since a truncated form of this letter has now become public, we judge it appropriate to present the larger context of our response.
In a previous letter to the same correspondent we had already indicated the canonical status of the Society of St. Pius X which we will summarize briefly here.
1.) The priests of the Society of St. Pius X are validly ordained, but they are suspended from exercising their priestly functions. To the extent that they adhere to the schism of the late Archbishop Lefebvre, they are also excommunicated.
2.) Concretely this means that the Masses offered by these priests are valid, but illicit i.e., contrary to the law of the Church.
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."
His second question was "Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass" and we responded stating:
"2. We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin."
His third question was: "Is it a sin for me to contribute to the Sunday collection a Pius X Mass" to which we responded:
"3. It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified."
Further, the correspondent took the Commission to task for not doing its job properly and we responded thus:
"This Pontifical Commission does not have the authority to coerce Bishops to provide for the celebration of the Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. Nonetheless, we are frequently in contact with Bishops and do all that we can to see that this provision is made. However, this provision also depends on the number of people who desire the 'traditional' Mass, their motives and the availability of priests who can celebrate it.
"You also state in your letter that the Holy Father has given you a 'right' to the Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. This is not correct. It is true that he has asked his brother Bishops to be generous in providing for the celebration of this Mass, but he has not stated that it is a 'right'. Presently it constitutes an exception to the Church's law and may be granted when the local Bishop judges it to be a valid pastoral service and when he has the priests who are available to celebrate it. Every Catholic has a right to the sacraments (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 843), but he does not have a right to them according to the rite of his choice."
We hope that this puts in a clearer light the letter about which you asked us.
With prayerful best wishes for this New Year of Our Lord 2003, I remain
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Rev. Msgr. Camille Perl Secretary
I hope the paper will have the decency to print this letter and issue a correction.
Posted by: Christopher Sarsfield at Oct 23, 2006 2:50:41 PM
The most relevant documentation is below, by Msgr. Camille Perl, Secretary of the Pontifical Ecclesia Dei Commission, concerning a private response which had been widely distributed:
http://www.unavoce.org/articles/2003/perl-011803.htm
"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." "
It is still a very murky subject, not least because schism is treated rather mildly by Rome these days, Cardinal Hoyos continues to maintain the SSPX is not in schism, and there are so many pastoral sensitivities flying about.
Posted by: Iacobus at Oct 23, 2006 2:58:35 PM
Zabrina Decker, vice chancellor of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee...
Posted by: Ian at Oct 23, 2006 3:25:49 PM
While I think that the Ecclesia Dei's interpretation has a great deal of weight, I don't see how their interpretation of the Sunday obligation canon is purely advisory and not binding on the local ordinary. Wouldn't the Pontifical Commission on Legislative Texts be the place to go for an authoritative interpretation?
That said, there is much to be said for leniency for the laity when it comes to regular attendance at SSPX chapels - at least at the present time when there is some well-founded hope for reconciliation in the near- to medium-term.
Posted by: Patrick Rothwell at Oct 23, 2006 3:34:22 PM
Hey - in the strictest sense can't you fulfill your obligation at an Eastern Orthodox church if there's no Latin rite within (some distance I don't remember)? We all know that THEY'RE valid and licit but not the same.
I'm never sure how anyone can argue to him or herself that 'valid but illicit' is a good thing other than in an emergency.
Posted by: Michael Tinkler at Oct 23, 2006 3:38:41 PM
Ian, Ms. Decker is incorrect in her assessment - it is clear that the faithful who attend any valid celebration of the Mass on a Sunday have fulfilled their Sunday obligation (even if it may be sinful to do so, depending on one's motives and opportunities). I don't understand your reasons for putting her name and her title in italics - there's nothing wrong with a woman being appointed as chancellor or vice chancellor (c. 482), it's not a position requiring orders (in fact, a chancellor is, technically, simply the chief notary of a diocese, though frequently other tasks are added to the job description)
Posted by: Tim Ferguson at Oct 23, 2006 3:40:33 PM
Several years ago, the Atlanta archiocese not only published statements against a "Catholic" ministry for Hispanics here but also sued and won a judgment against the group for misusing the name "Catholic." However, there was no question there of a validly ordained ministry.
I'm confused by a statement in this article that the sacraments at masses celebrated by validly ordained priests are not themselves valid. Did I misunderstand?
Posted by: ron chandonia at Oct 23, 2006 3:50:02 PM
According to Fr.Gerald Murray in Latin Mass magazine (he was writing his disseration at the Gregorian on excommunication and was responding to an erroneous interpretation of it bythe SSPX)Cardinal Ratzinger in an interview asserted that attendance at mass in a SSPX chapel does fulfill the obligation.He said just because you associate with schismatics does not make you one.
Posted by: franklyn at Oct 23, 2006 4:25:30 PM
I think the gist of Msgr. Perl's letter is that individuals who attend a Mass at an SSPX chuch are not committing a mortal sin if they are doing so because of an attachment to the 1962 Roman Rite. If their intent is to schism, that is another story.
I have always been amazed at how traditionalist groups and new age atheistic spin offs are equivocated. The former deals with an institution in schism over liturgy; the latter deals with people who are technically heretics resulting from their rejection of nearly every aspect of Catholic teaching.
I have said this many times and I will say it again. I say this as somemone who has never attended an SSPX chapel and go around arguing that Lefebvre's ordinations were anything but an act of schism. Listen up arm chair apologists. I would venture to say that the way to bring many if not most schismatic traditionalists back into the fold is through healing, not polemics, not quoting of canon law, and not through apologetics.
I have seen this through my own parish, which has a vibrant community and a generously applied indult.
It seems very odd to me that so much is focused upon the SSPX when in fact I can go into any parish in my relatively normal diocese and see entire parts of the Mass made up out of thin air on any given Sunday.
Eric
Posted by: Eric at Oct 23, 2006 4:27:27 PM
Just to make it known, not only is it possible to attend a Greek Orthodox Mass when no Latin Rite Mass is available, that is also the case with Masses of the Polish National Catholic Church.
They went into schism about 1897 but their Bishop (and consequently all subsequently consecrated Bishops) received consecration from a Dutch Old Catholic Bishop who validly could trace his consecration back to a valid Roman Catholic Bishop.
Representatives of the PNCC meet annually with representatives of the Vatican to discuss the possibility of someday reuniting.
Posted by: Ray from MN at Oct 23, 2006 4:44:06 PM
If you are unable to attend a Sunday Mass because of no availability of a Catholic Church then you are automatically dispensed from the obligation.
Pontificia Commissio "Ecclesia Dei" in a letter by Msgr Perl dated January 18, 2003 in response to an article in The Remnant.
In a previous letter to the same correspondent we had already indicated the canonical status of the Society of St. Pius X which we will summarize briefly here.
1.) The priests of the Society of St. Pius X are validly ordained, but they are suspended from exercising their priestly functions. To the extent that they adhere to the schism of the late Archbishop Lefebvre, they are also excommunicated.
2.) Concretely this means that the Masses offered by these priests are valid, but illicit i.e., contrary to the law of the Church.
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."
His second question was "Is it a sin for me to attend a Pius X Mass" and we responded stating:
"2. We have already told you that we cannot recommend your attendance at such a Mass and have explained the reason why. If your primary reason for attending were to manifest your desire to separate yourself from communion with the Roman Pontiff and those in communion with him, it would be a sin. If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin."
His third question was: "Is it a sin for me to contribute to the Sunday collection a Pius X Mass" to which we responded:
"3. It would seem that a modest contribution to the collection at Mass could be justified."
So basically he is saying only in a strict sense could a SSPX chapel satisfy the Sunday obligation, but they do not recommend going.
Posted by: Jeff Miller at Oct 23, 2006 5:10:40 PM
The question on attending masses offered by priests associated with the SSPX is not exactly clear cut, but the way I see things, if a diocese is not generous with the indult, such as the LA Archdiocese, the San Jose diocese, and for that matter, just about all diocese' in Southren California and the South for that matter, then one could possibly justify attending a SSPX chapel as long as they do not get sucked into the schismatic mentality(and this may prove difficult because of the cult of personality that surrounds Bp. Williamson in t he english speaking world).
That said, in Milwaukee, there is a weekly tridentine high mass at 10AM in a central location every sunday, so it would be far more difficult to justify attendence at a SSPX chapel.
Posted by: John B at Oct 23, 2006 5:32:02 PM
A most interesting article. Milwaukee's problem compares with the Archdiocese of Detroit. Here, the pro-Tridentine groups include the SSPX, the Society of St. Pius V, and a sedevacantist group surrounding Bishops Daniel Dolan (a former Detroit high school seminarian) and Donald Sanborn.
Old Catholic groups include several Polish National congregations, at least one bishop of the North American Old Roman Catholic Church, and some sundry liberal fringe groups.
For traditionalists who want a Mass in communion with the local bishop, there is a Sunday Indult Mass celebrated at historic St. Josaphat Church. (It took a number of years and a lot of lobbying from Una Voce Detroit to get the Cardinal's permission). Though I'm not a traditionalist myself, I support the Indult in order to reduce the number of clerical freaks running around and confusing the faithful.
Posted by: tonydoc at Oct 23, 2006 5:51:14 PM
too bad they didn't include St. Mary's Catholic Faith Community or other churches that had a little too much Weakland-izing.
Posted by: cathy at Oct 23, 2006 6:34:13 PM
This discussion makes one vividly aware that Jesus should have had a canon lawyer as one of his apostles. He might have been able to determine whether the disciples ate the corn on the sabbath validly but illicitly.
Posted by: Dan Crawford at Oct 23, 2006 6:47:47 PM
This discussion makes one vividly aware that Jesus should have had a canon lawyer as one of his apostles. He might have been able to determine whether the disciples ate the corn on the sabbath validly but illicitly.
Posted by: Dan Crawford at Oct 23, 2006 6:48:04 PM
This discussion makes one vividly aware that Jesus should have had a canon lawyer as one of his apostles. He might have been able to determine whether the disciples ate the corn on the sabbath validly but illicitly.
Posted by: Dan Crawford at Oct 23, 2006 6:49:36 PM
:)
What Dan said.
Posted by: Adam at Oct 23, 2006 8:11:16 PM
I'm a bit puzzled at the attention and near-tenderness shown to the Society of St.Pius X, because it represents the most reactionary, not conservative, elements in Catholicism. In Ireland and Britain, it's members have bought redundant Protestant churches and keep out of the mainstream of Church life. Why do they do this? Because they are schismatics, not harmless liturgical traditionalists. They are not in communion with the Holy Father and none of us Catholics should worship with them. The most devoted members of the SSPX and kindred groups want nothing to do with us.
Posted by: Fr.Fergus at Oct 23, 2006 8:33:20 PM
Amy asked:
I'd like to know if any other diocesan papers have done something like this.
The Diocese of San Bernardino put out a statement about exactly this, which is still on its website here.
This was the main reason behind this diocese's heresy trial of Ned Reidy ten months ago -- they wanted to make it clear that he was not part of the [Roman] Catholic Church, as their spokesman explained here.
Posted by: Lawrence King at Oct 23, 2006 8:45:57 PM
I think Fr. Fergus is mostly right. But that is the point.
They ARE drifting further and further out of the Catholic orbit. And taking a lot of people with them. We don't WANT that to happen. The Holy Father is determined to do everything conceivable to nip this developing schism in the bud and reverse the trend.
Posted by: Jeff at Oct 23, 2006 8:53:08 PM
