SSPX or Orthodox
#71
(10-03-2009, 04:43 PM)Scipio_a Wrote:
(10-03-2009, 12:31 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: I can't really imagine a place where there is both an SSPX chapel and an Eastern Orthodox church but no regular Catholic church.

I can't imagine a place where an SSPX chapel isn't a regular Catholic Church...unless you are saying that the NO is somehow regular...LOL

Well, in a sense, since the NO is the Ordinary Form of the Mass, it is 'regular' (in the since of oft used), although the TLM, although Extraordinary not Ordinary, is a Form of the Mass as well, so it is not 'irregular', just not the Ordinary Form.

I think Resurrexi meant that the SSPX is not a 'regular Catholic parish' because they, as an order, have no Canonical standing within the Church and have an irregular relationship with the Holy See (whether the SSPX is in full communion with Rome is debatable).
Reply
#72
nsper7,

The SSPX is in communion with the Catholic Church. Having jurisdiction taken away does not mean one is no longer in communion with the Church. A priest who molested young boys who's had his jurisdiction taken away is not outside the Church just because of his lack of jurisdiction and/or defrocking. Okay?

The SSPX is in communion (or full communion as is popular nowadays) with the Church. Okay?
Reply
#73
(10-03-2009, 07:22 PM)CatholicThurifer Wrote: nsper7,

The SSPX is in communion with the Catholic Church. Having jurisdiction taken away does not mean one is no longer in communion with the Church. A priest who molested young boys who's had his jurisdiction taken away is not outside the Church just because of his lack of jurisdiction and/or defrocking. Okay?

The SSPX is in communion (or full communion as is popular nowadays) with the Church. Okay?

But a Priest can have his Priestly faculties removed such that any Mass he celebrates, while still valid, is illicit and his Absolutions, unless given in extreme circumstances (i.e. a person is dying and this Priest who lacks ordinary jurisdiction is the only person who can hear the Confession and grant Absolution), are invalid.

Is the SSPX in communion with Rome? After all, they are being disobedient.
Reply
#74
Yes, they are in communion with Rome.

They are not being disobedient. Can you show the forum how they are being disobedient? No, of course not.
Reply
#75
(10-03-2009, 12:34 AM)NonSumDignus Wrote:
(10-02-2009, 11:07 PM)CatholicThurifer Wrote: A priest is not absolutely required to have an Altar server. I've been to a Mass without an Altar server, and I would have served if I had known the priest needed one. Someone in the pews made sure to make all the responses.

How would the ablutions work? Switching hands?

If I recall correctly, the Priest uses an Ablution Cup. At some point in the Mass (or before) the Priest uncovers the cup for easy access to the water in order to perform the ablutions.

http://www.sanctamissa.org/en/sacristy/s...n-cup.html

In Corde Regis,
Joshua
Reply
#76
(10-03-2009, 08:17 PM)Joshua Wrote:
(10-03-2009, 12:34 AM)NonSumDignus Wrote:
(10-02-2009, 11:07 PM)CatholicThurifer Wrote: A priest is not absolutely required to have an Altar server. I've been to a Mass without an Altar server, and I would have served if I had known the priest needed one. Someone in the pews made sure to make all the responses.

How would the ablutions work? Switching hands?

If I recall correctly, the Priest uses an Ablution Cup. At some point in the Mass (or before) the Priest uncovers the cup for easy access to the water in order to perform the ablutions.

http://www.sanctamissa.org/en/sacristy/s...n-cup.html

In Corde Regis,
Joshua

I've seen those; I suppose that makes sense. But in the TLM the priest has to cleanse his fingers with wine too; how does this happen?
Reply
#77
(10-02-2009, 05:33 PM)Scipio_a Wrote:
(10-02-2009, 05:56 AM)Benno Wrote: GOOD WILL HUNTING VIDEO CLIP

thanks scipio!  :)

Benno,

Using non sequitur video clips does not make you as cool as me.

You have to do something like this:

The opening shows the destruction of the NO and Martin Sheen (Nsper7) in Saigon waiting...waiting to figure out...SSPX or Orthodox


Dude, you kill me!     :laughing: :laughing:

Drive on!
Reply
#78
(10-02-2009, 09:57 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Agreed, which is why despite the accusation made against me, I haven't attacked him as I have the liberal, modernist troll you reference. :)
"Well, the SSPX pray for the Pope in the Canon, the Orthodox do not. Would be a no brainer for a Trad, but your liberal, modernist view might be different! " What a short memory you have!
Reply
#79
(10-03-2009, 09:26 PM)SoCalLocal Wrote:
(10-02-2009, 09:57 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Agreed, which is why despite the accusation made against me, I haven't attacked him as I have the liberal, modernist troll you reference. :)
"Well, the SSPX pray for the Pope in the Canon, the Orthodox do not. Would be a no brainer for a Trad, but your liberal, modernist view might be different! " What a short memory you have!

I do not consider stating the truth to be an 'attack'. I have not called him a troll because he is not. A liberal and a modernist he is.
Reply
#80
(10-03-2009, 09:28 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(10-03-2009, 09:26 PM)SoCalLocal Wrote:
(10-02-2009, 09:57 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Agreed, which is why despite the accusation made against me, I haven't attacked him as I have the liberal, modernist troll you reference. :)
"Well, the SSPX pray for the Pope in the Canon, the Orthodox do not. Would be a no brainer for a Trad, but your liberal, modernist view might be different! " What a short memory you have!

I do not consider stating the truth to be an 'attack'. I have not called him a troll because he is not. A liberal and a modernist he is.

That is the first time anyone has ever accused me of being liberal. And a modernist...eh, not really either. I may not be a hardcore Trad, but that does not mean I am not Traditional at all (perhaps a Neo-Con with some Trad tendencies...who knows) or that I am, even worse, a "progressive".
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)