Obligated to go to NO Mass?
#1
If some of the NO churches within driving distance have reopened on a limited basis (40% capacity, masks, “social distancing,” outdoors, parking lot... are we obligated to go if we can? I’m pretty sure CITH is another of the rules for now. This long absence from my usual TLM church hasn’t been great for my faith in some ways, and I cannot really stand the thought of going to an NO Mass under these circumstances. Even during normal times, the NO Mass was mostly a misery.
Reply
#2
You might get different opinions but mine is, no, you do not have to attend the NO Mass.  The NO Mass is deficient in many ways and it can be down right harmful to our faith.  We are not obligated to do anything that would be harmful to our faith.  Therefore, you need not attend the NO Masses around you.  That's the short answer, anyway.  Others here are far more learned than I am and can probably give you better, more detailed reasons as to why you, and no Catholic, is obligated to attend the ecumenical, Protestanized Mass of Paul VI.
"For the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists."
- Pope St. Pius X

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."
- 2 Timothy 4:3-4

"Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
[-] The following 1 user Likes SeekerofChrist's post:
  • Margaret-Mary
Reply
#3
Has your bishop removed the dispensation from fulfilling the Sunday obligation by Mass attendance? If not then it’s an easy answer for now. 

I second what SeekerofChrist said. It’s easy for me because we have a TLM 40 minutes away. However, even if the TLM was further away or only infrequent I would not attend the NO. It would be a step backwards for me to start attending the NO and a scandal to my children who have only known the TLM. Even if I was single I still wouldn’t attend the NO. I will defer to others on the critique of the NO but a great start would be the Ottaviani Intervention if you need more convincing.
[-] The following 3 users Like traditiovivens's post:
  • Ambrosiano, Margaret-Mary, SeekerofChrist
Reply
#4
I think many of the faithful are still under dispensation from their bishops for the obligation to attend Mass.

That being said, I still do not buy the argument that somebody can miss Mass because it's harmful to their faith. This confuses me, because on the one hand, Traditionalist Catholics seem to portray themselves as fierce warriors in the Church Militant valiantly fighting against Satan and his minions. But then, apparently an hour spent at a Mass not to their liking is enough to crumble their faith.

This also seems a bit perplexing seeing that the Church holds martyrs in such high regard. Just think of the very early Christians, who held onto their faith despite the constant threat of martyrdom and persecution, holding onto their faith even after escaping attack or witnessing the execution of family and friends. If they could hold onto their faith in those circumstances, I would think that folks could kind of tough it out and make it through a NO Mass with their spiritual life still intact.
[-] The following 2 users Like LionHippo's post:
  • Adventus, austenbosten
Reply
#5
(06-14-2020, 01:18 PM)LionHippo Wrote: That being said, I still do not buy the argument that somebody can miss Mass because it's harmful to their faith.  This confuses me, because on the one hand, Traditionalist Catholics seem to portray themselves as fierce warriors in the Church Militant valiantly fighting against Satan and his minions.  But then, apparently an hour spent at a Mass not to their liking is enough to crumble their faith. 

This is a strawman.  No one said that spending an hour at a Mass we do not like will crumble our faith.  We have a number of issues that concern us about the NO Mass.  I'm sure you know what they are, even if you disagree with us.  But instead of offering a strawman critique, you might instead tell us why the concerns such as those in the Ottaviani Intervention are misplaced or incorrect.

Quote:This also seems a bit perplexing seeing that the Church holds martyrs in such high regard.  Just think of the very early Christians, who held onto their faith despite the constant threat of martyrdom and persecution, holding onto their faith even after escaping attack or witnessing the execution of family and friends.  If they could hold onto their faith in those circumstances, I would think that folks could kind of tough it out and make it through a NO Mass with their spiritual life still intact.

Following this logic, there's really never a reason to miss Mass.  Bombs raining down in a war?  Go to Mass.  COVID-19 got you down?  Go to Mass.  Blizzard cover the roads in deadly patches of black ice?  Go to Mass.  Of course, you didn't say that and I don't think you would.  However, that some Christians have suffered martyrdom is hardly a good critique of traditionalist concerns about attending the NO Mass.  Not every NO Mass is as badly celebrated as the very worst of the NO Masses, but if the NO weren't corrosive to some people's faith, then we wouldn't have a traditional Catholic movement.
"For the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists."
- Pope St. Pius X

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."
- 2 Timothy 4:3-4

"Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
[-] The following 1 user Likes SeekerofChrist's post:
  • Margaret-Mary
Reply
#6
(06-13-2020, 10:03 PM)Margaret-Mary Wrote: If some of the NO churches within driving distance have reopened on a limited basis (40% capacity, masks, “social distancing,” outdoors, parking lot... are we obligated to go if we can? I’m pretty sure CITH is another of the rules for now. This long absence from my usual TLM church hasn’t been great for my faith in some ways, and I cannot really stand the thought of going to an NO Mass under these circumstances. Even during normal times, the NO Mass was mostly a misery.

I guess it depends on your needs.  I will not wear a mask, and I will not go wherever they are required.
[-] The following 4 users Like Credidi Propter's post:
  • antiquarian, Jeanannemarie, Margaret-Mary, The Tax Collector
Reply
#7
(06-13-2020, 10:03 PM)Margaret-Mary Wrote: If some of the NO churches within driving distance have reopened on a limited basis (40% capacity, masks, “social distancing,” outdoors, parking lot... are we obligated to go if we can? I’m pretty sure CITH is another of the rules for now. This long absence from my usual TLM church hasn’t been great for my faith in some ways, and I cannot really stand the thought of going to an NO Mass under these circumstances. Even during normal times, the NO Mass was mostly a misery.
If your bishop has lifted dispensation but there is no EF mass available then yes you should attend an OF mass.
Reply
#8
This has been beaten to death in plenty of other threads here. A simple search will provide help, without needing to rehash this.

The principle, however, is simple. If there is some risk of harm to your Faith from attending some deficient liturgy (e.g. where sacrilege or liturgical abuse is rife), then certainly you not only need not go, but you must not go. You can never put your Faith at risk.

The question then becomes a practical and situational one.

Does the Novus Ordo have real deficiencies? Yes. Are these sufficient that they can put your Faith at risk? Yes. Do they do so in all circumstances/churches? I don't think that can be said to be true, seeing as a priest could say the Novus Ordo with Roman Canon facing the altar, with full solemnity, and by preaching and action substitute for those parts which are deficient, thus minimizing that risk.

So, a Catholic needs to look at what they have. Is the church where they can attend Mass offering a Mass that teaches the proper notion of the priesthood, that the Mass is not a meal but a Sacrifice, that the faithful are mere participants and not priests, and that the Real Presence needs to be respected by receiving only on the tongue, and only priests and deacons ought to be offering Communion? Or is it not teaching by the liturgy these things.

If it is a risk to your Faith, then you have no obligation to go and an obligation to refrain from going. If it is not a risk, then you would have an obligation to go, but, seeing as it is a highly situational matter, generic statements about the generic problems won't solve your own particular question.

If you want specifics, then detail specifics about the Mass you propose to attend.
[-] The following 2 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102, traditiovivens
Reply
#9
(06-14-2020, 04:54 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: This has been beaten to death in plenty of other threads here. A simple search will provide help, without needing to rehash this.

The principle, however, is simple. If there is some risk of harm to your Faith from attending some deficient liturgy (e.g. where sacrilege or liturgical abuse is rife), then certainly you not only need not go, but you must not go. You can never put your Faith at risk.

The question then becomes a practical and situational one.

Does the Novus Ordo have real deficiencies? Yes. Are these sufficient that they can put your Faith at risk? Yes. Do they do so in all circumstances/churches? I don't think that can be said to be true, seeing as a priest could say the Novus Ordo with Roman Canon facing the altar, with full solemnity, and by preaching and action substitute for those parts which are deficient, thus minimizing that risk.

So, a Catholic needs to look at what they have. Is the church where they can attend Mass offering a Mass that teaches the proper notion of the priesthood, that the Mass is not a meal but a Sacrifice, that the faithful are mere participants and not priests, and that the Real Presence needs to be respected by receiving only on the tongue, and only priests and deacons ought to be offering Communion? Or is it not teaching by the liturgy these things.

If it is a risk to your Faith, then you have no obligation to go and an obligation to refrain from going. If it is not a risk, then you would have an obligation to go, but, seeing as it is a highly situational matter, generic statements about the generic problems won't solve your own particular question.

If you want specifics, then detail specifics about the Mass you propose to attend.

Thanks for taking the time to answer. Sorry, I thought I was being specific when I described the restrictions of the ones that are happening near me. (Parking lot, 40% capacity, masks, distancing, CITH, NO).

Yes, I understand that the general topic of NO Mass obligation has been thoroughly discussed. I was asking about it under the current circumstances.

If they are allowing only 40% capacity, are we obligated to go and see if we are able to get a space? Or is it still optional whether we go or not? That's my question, sorry for being somewhat unclear.
Reply
#10
(06-14-2020, 01:50 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(06-14-2020, 01:18 PM)LionHippo Wrote: That being said, I still do not buy the argument that somebody can miss Mass because it's harmful to their faith.  This confuses me, because on the one hand, Traditionalist Catholics seem to portray themselves as fierce warriors in the Church Militant valiantly fighting against Satan and his minions.  But then, apparently an hour spent at a Mass not to their liking is enough to crumble their faith. 

This is a strawman.  No one said that spending an hour at a Mass we do not like will crumble our faith.  We have a number of issues that concern us about the NO Mass.  I'm sure you know what they are, even if you disagree with us.  But instead of offering a strawman critique, you might instead tell us why the concerns such as those in the Ottaviani Intervention are misplaced or incorrect.

Quote:This also seems a bit perplexing seeing that the Church holds martyrs in such high regard.  Just think of the very early Christians, who held onto their faith despite the constant threat of martyrdom and persecution, holding onto their faith even after escaping attack or witnessing the execution of family and friends.  If they could hold onto their faith in those circumstances, I would think that folks could kind of tough it out and make it through a NO Mass with their spiritual life still intact.

Following this logic, there's really never a reason to miss Mass.  Bombs raining down in a war?  Go to Mass.  COVID-19 got you down?  Go to Mass.  Blizzard cover the roads in deadly patches of black ice?  Go to Mass.  Of course, you didn't say that and I don't think you would.  However, that some Christians have suffered martyrdom is hardly a good critique of traditionalist concerns about attending the NO Mass.  Not every NO Mass is as badly celebrated as the very worst of the NO Masses, but if the NO weren't corrosive to some people's faith, then we wouldn't have a traditional Catholic movement.

We need to ask the question as to whether or no the NO is a sin to attend. Though it is clearly inferior and implicitly protestant, there is nothing in the liturgy that is explicitly protestant. According to Fr. Ripp, papal infallibility prevents any officially mass promulgated thought the pope's authority to be sinful when followed according to the rubrics. This does not mean that the implicit effects will not be damaging to some people's faith.
CGSExposed.com
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)