Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:56 pm Post subject: Bishop Adamec disparages the Indult & the Latin Mass
Johnstown Tribune Democrat
Saturday, June 11, 2005
Reader's Forum, Page A6
Bishop: Letter may confuse faithful
While it is my policy not to write letters to the editor, I feel a necessity to do so in response to Dr. Brian Kopp's June 1 letter ("Byzantine churches offer an alternative").
My motivation is not to enter into a debate with the writer, but to avoid confusion on the part of your readers.
His observation that the Old Catholic Church is schismatic (separated from the authority of the pope), therefore, Roman Catholics do not fulfill their Sunday obligation by attending there, is correct.
However, it is not Roman, as it is not under the Roman pontiff, nor is it located in Patton, but in St. Lawrence.
There is no problem with mass being celebrated in Latin, or in any other language. The "traditional Latin Mass" to which Kopp refers has to do with the very order of Mass, which developed over centuries.
Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II (as will Benedict XVI) have promoted the return to a more original order, as the Second Vatican Council established with the concurrence of the Pope.
That is the current order of Mass for all Latin Rite Roman Catholics. It is the Mass that the pope celebrates.
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has assured us bishops that the "traditional Latin Mass" is not to be considered as another rite that the faithful can choose at will. It has been allowed (with permission of the diocesan bishop) to facilitate the return of some to the Roman Catholic Church.
Unfortunately, its usage has been misused.
The Liturgy of the Eastern churches in union with Rome (Byzantine) can be legitimately attended by members of the Roman Catholic Church of the Latin Rite, and vice verse. Those of our faithful who wish to be a part of another legitimate worship community on a regular basis, however, need to join and embrace that whole tradition, involving its spirituality and sacramental system.
It is called a "change of rite" and is done officially with the consent of both bishops.
Most Rev. Joseph V. Adamec
Bishop, Altoona-Johnstown Roman Catholic Diocese
Hollidaysburg
To my knowledge, this is the first time in his 17 years as bishop that Adamec has personally written a letter to the editor on any issue in his diocese. Interestingly, Bishop Adamec even gets it wrong in trying to correct the location of the Old Catholic church in question. Contrary to his assertion, that church IS in Patton PA, but to his credit, it IS on St. Lawrence Road.
His letter is in response to my recent letter to the editor of the same newspaper:
Johnstown Tribune Democrat
6/1/05
Reader's Forum, p A6
Byzantine churches offer an alternative
St. Lazarus Old Catholic Church in Patton has been offering the traditional Latin Mass for some time now. It has drawn in local Catholics seeking reverent liturgies. But, unfortunately, St. Lazarus is a schismatic church, not in union with Rome.
Catholics repeatedly have petitioned the Altoona-Johnstown Diocese to offer a traditional Latin Mass. The bishops are instructed by Rome to permit such a mass any time Catholics request it.
This diocese contends, incorrectly, that allowance for such a mass is only to be made to bring Catholics out of schismatic churches offering the traditional Mass.
Obviously, with St. Lazarus Church offering this mass, the bishop's stated conditions are met. He should be instituting a traditional Latin Mass immediately, according to his own word and the clear guidelines set by Rome.
For those Catholics frustrated by liturgical abuses, bongo masses and heterodoxy in the local diocese, there are alternatives. Pittsburgh obeys Rome and offers the traditional Latin Mass at St. Boniface every Sunday.
Locally, a wonderful option is available in the Divine Liturgy offered by numerous Byzantine Catholic churches. These churches are in full communion with the Pope, they have their own bishops, and their Masses are sacred, reverent and beautiful.
Until orthodoxy and reverent Masses are restored to the local Roman Catholic diocese, Catholics should avail themselves of the other fine options available to them locally and regionally, and support only those faithful and obedient churches with their donations.
I'd love to hear your comments on Bishop Adamec's letter, and any rebuttals.
I would encourage the Angel Queen forum members to distribute Bishop Adamec's comments, and if you feel so moved, write a letter to the editor of the Johnstown PA Tribune Democrat to correct any misperceptions you may percieve in his letter.
DIOCESE OF ALTOONA-JOHNSTOWN
Most Rev. Joseph V. Adamec, D.D., S.T.L.
126 Logan BoulevardHollidaysburg 16648
PHONE: 814-695-5579
FAX: 814-695-8894
email: dajreply@nb.net
Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 9:41 pm Post subject: Re: Bishop Adamec disparages the Indult & the Latin Mass
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
"It has been allowed (with permission of the diocesan bishop) to facilitate the return of some to the Roman Catholic Church,"[said Adamec]
What a load of B.S. This bishop apparently has not even taken the time to read Ecclesia Dei. Every traditional Catholic I know has never left the Church. Even if Adamec's statement were true, he apparently has no desire to "facilitate the return of some to the Roman Catholic Church".
The following text is from the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. This commission is responsible for carrying out the Holy Father's desire, expressed in his apostolic letter Eccleisa Dei, that bishops grant a "wide and generous application" of the norms for the celebration of Mass according to the Missal of 1962 (Tridentine Mass). This letter was undated, but signed by Augustin Cardinal Mayer, Prefect of the Pontifical Commission. It had been delivered to the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and further disseminated by a memorandum dated 19 April 1991, from the Office of the General Secretary, NCCB, to all the bishops in the United States.
I write to you as a brother in the episcopal college charged by the Holy Father to carry out the provisions of his Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei of 2 July 1988. My objective in addressing myself to you now is precisely to encourage you in the exercise of your pastoral mission to those who legitimately request the celebration of the Holy Mass according to the 1962 typical edition of the Roman Missal.
Perhaps a review of developments which led to the issuance of Ecclesia Dei would be helpful in this regard.
1. On 3 October 1984, the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship issued Quattour abhinc annos in which the Holy Father granted to diocesan bishops "the possibility of using an indult whereby priests and faithful . . . may be able to celebrate Mass by using the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition."
The following conditions were stipulated:
a) that those requesting permission do not "call into question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Pius VI in 1970";
b) that such celebrations take place only for groups requesting them, not in parish churches (except with the bishop's permission in extraordinary cases) and under conditions laid down by the bishop;
c) that "these celebrations must be according to the 1962 Missal and in Latin";
d) that there "be no interchanging of texts and rites of the two Missals"; and
e) that each bishop had to inform the Congregation "of the concessions granted by him, and, at the end of a year from the granting of this indult, he must report on the result of the application."
2. A special Commissio Cardinalitia ad hoc ipsum instituta charged with reviewing the use made of the indult met in December of 1986. At that time the Cardinals unanimously agreed that the conditions laid down in Quattour abhinc annos were too restrictive and should be relaxed.
3. As you well know, in response to the illicit ordination of bishops at Econe on 30 June 1988 and wishing to uphold the principles which had been established in the previous and unfortunately unfruitful dialogue with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the Holy Father issued Ecclesia Dei, motu proprio, on 2 July 1988.
While insisting that the root of the schismatic act of Archbishop Lefebvre lies in an "incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition" which fails to "take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition" (no. 4), he also maintained with equal firmness that "it is necessary that all the pastors and the other faithful have a new awareness, not only of the lawfulness but also of the richness for the Church of a diversity of charisms, traditions of spirituality, and apostolate" (no. 5, a).
Consequently, addressing himself "to all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous liturgical and disciplinary forms of the Latin tradition," and not just to the former adherents of Archbishop Lefebvre, he expressed his will "to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations (no. 5, c). In order to provide for these legitimate desires of the faithful he established this Pontifical Commission and indicated his mind with regard to its primary task, stating:
". . . respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 typical edition (no. 6, c)."
Consequently, Your Excellency, we wish to encourage you to facilitate the proper and reverent celebration of the liturgical rites according to the Roman Miss of 1962 wherever there is a genuine desire for this on the part of the priests and faithful. This should not be construed as a promotion of that Missal in prejudice to the one promulgated eight years later, but simply a pastoral provision to meet the "rightful aspirations" of those who wish to worship according to the Latin liturgical tradition as celebrated for centuries.
In the light of the Holy Father's motu proprio, then, we offer the following guidelines and suggestions:
1. There is no reason now why the so-called "Tridentine" Mass cannot be celebrated in a parish church where this would be a genuine pastoral service to the faithful asking for it. Care should be taken, of course, for a harmonious integration into the already existing parish liturgical schedule.
2. The regularity and frequency of the celebration of this liturgy, whether to be celebrated on Sundays, Holydays, and/or weekdays, will depend on the needs of the faithful. Our recommendation is that, in places where the faithful have made a request for the regular celebration for the Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal, a weekly Sunday and Holyday Mass be scheduled in a central location and at a convenient time on a trial basis for a period of several months. Afterwards further evaluation and adjustment should be made.
3. Of course the celebrants of the "Tridentine" Mass should not fail in their preaching and contacts with the faithful attending such Masses to emphasize their own adherence to the legislation of the universal Church and their acknowledgment of the doctrinal and juridical value of the liturgy as revised after the Second Vatican Council. Under such conditions, it would seem unnecessary, even unduly painful, to impose further restrictions upon those who wish to attend such celebrations.
4. Although the Holy Father has given this Pontifical Commission the faculty to grant the use of the 1962 typical edition of the Roman Missal to all those who request it, while the Commission informs the appropriate Ordinary thereof, we would much prefer that such faculties be granted by the Ordinary himself for the sake of strengthening the bond of ecclesial communion between those priests and faithful and their local Pastors.
5. Following upon the "wide and generous application" of the principles laid down in Quattour abhinc annos and the directives of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council (cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium 51 & 54), the new Lectionary in the vernacular could be used as a way of "providing a richer fare for the faithful at the table of God's Word" in Masses celebrated according to the 1962 Missal. However, we believe that this usage should not be imposed on congregations who decidedly wish to maintain the former liturgical tradition in its integrity according to the provision of the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei. Such an imposition might also be less likely to invite back to full communion with the Church at this time those who have lapsed into schismatic worship.
6. Since a number of older and retired priests who have a deep appreciation of the previous Latin liturgical tradition have approached their individual Ordinaries as well as this Pontifical Commission to obtain the celebret for the use of the 1962 Missal, it would seem particularly suitable to utilize the services of such priests where possible for the celebration of this Mass. It may well be discovered that even retired priests who have not requested this faculty would nonetheless be willing to provide this special form of pastoral care for those who request it.
Finally, Your Excellency, it is my sincere desire that this fraternal letter will be for us who are members of the episcopal college an incentive to exercise that manus episcopale described so beautifully in Lumen Gentium 23:
"Individual bishops, insofar as they are set over particular Churches, exercise their pastoral office over the portion of the People of God assigned to them, not over other Churches, nor the Church universal. But insofar as they are members of the episcopal college and legitimate successors of the apostles, by Christ's arrangement and decree, each is bound to have such care and solicitude for the whole Church which, though it not be exercised by an act of jurisdiction, does for all that redound in an eminent degree to the advantage of the universal Church. For all the bishops have the obligation of fostering and safeguarding the unity of faith and of upholding the discipline which is common to the whole Church."
"I am pleased to avail myself of this opportunity to extend my best wishes to you in your shepherding of the flock entrusted to your care and to assure you of my willing collaboration that, in all circumstances, God may be glorified in the worship of His Holy Church."
Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:09 pm Post subject: Re: Bishop Adamec disparages the Indult & the Latin Mass
Land of the Irish wrote:
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
"It has been allowed (with permission of the diocesan bishop) to facilitate the return of some to the Roman Catholic Church,"[said Adamec]
What a load of B.S.
Even if Adamec's statement were true, he apparently has no desire to "facilitate the return of some to the Roman Catholic Church".
Did you notice that? He admits there is a "schismatic" church, he knows it is offering the traditional Latin Mass, he falsely claims the Indult is only to bring Catholics out of schism, he refuses still to permit the traditional Latin Mass, and has the nerve to claim that the Novus Ordo IS "the return to a more original order, as the Second Vatican Council established."
Last edited by Dr. Brian Kopp on Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:23 pm Post subject: Re: Bishop Adamec disparages the Indult & the Latin Mass
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
Its hard to believe that a man with such low intellect, and even lower integrity, could manage to get that many blatant falsehoods into one short letter to the editor.
Yes, that is hard to believe. However, it is not hard for me to believe that such a man has been appointed a bishop and remains in good standing.
a) that those requesting permission do not "call into question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Pius VI in 1970"
You wanted a comment. I'll comment. This is akin to a forced confession. Coercion. Cross your fingers when you say it, or don't. No reasonable person will swear to anything under such threat. And permission isn't needed. There is Quo Primum. Let those who deny the rightful Mass to Catholics be anathema, to God and His Church.
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
d) that there "be no interchanging of texts and rites of the two Missals";
It seems the inevitable method of the 'indult'. I've seen it many times (see below and the lectionary).
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
While insisting that the root of the schismatic act of Archbishop Lefebvre lies in an "incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition" which fails to "take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition"
That is, he didn't feel The Mass, or Catholicism, 'needed what's bringin up ta date'. Since when is that a schismatic act? In fact, it sounds downright like heresy or apostacy to oppose such good efforts by those who cleave to God and His Church.
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
1. There is no reason now why the so-called "Tridentine" Mass cannot be celebrated in a parish church
I can think of one - mixing of rites. The Holy Mass must be the only liturgy in a parish. Any remaining 'new church' parishes would be separate. The very validly of the Pauline Rite is called into question. Again, look at how everyone from the Curia down to the highest 'EM' treats what they claim are consecrated hosts. They don't seem to believe these are any more than memorial wafers. Never mind the change in the words. The intention, everywhere, seems clear, and can be contrasted with what someone just posted of a comparison with the Lutheran, who do not even confess transubstantiation, and yet were said to show more reverence to what they doctrinally and openly might call a 'cookie'.
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
3. Of course the celebrants of the "Tridentine" Mass should not fail in their preaching and contacts with the faithful attending such Masses to emphasize their own adherence to the legislation of the universal Church and their acknowledgment of the doctrinal and juridical value of the liturgy as revised after the Second Vatican Council.
The Pauiline Rite is not The Mass, and not the liturgy of the one, universal Church. The bishops know this and punish Catholics who object to the Pauline Rite, and have suppressed, as witness this letter, The Holy Mass - assuming they even have the desire or capacity, or holy priests, to offer Mass were they so ordered.
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
the new Lectionary in the vernacular could be used as a way of "providing a richer fare for the faithful at the table of God's Word" in Masses celebrated according to the 1962 Missal.
Sure, if The Mass were the same as the 'new order', Novus Ordo, Pauline Rite. These are two different liturgies, one Catholic, one apparently little more than Lutheran, for two very different religions.
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
Such an imposition might also be less likely to invite back to full communion with the Church at this time those who have lapsed into schismatic worship.
Surely he means himself. Liberals are like that. They speak of themselves in criticizing others. This guy is no different, and as predictable.
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
For all the bishops have the obligation of fostering and safeguarding the unity of faith and of upholding the discipline which is common to the whole Church.
Except when they refuse, and boot themselves in that way right out of The Church - even if no one tells them. See the last 40 years!
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
Augustin Cardinal Mayer, Prefect
The whole Ecclesia Dei committee seems upset with their 'indult'. They are apparently making no secret, at this point, that it is another 'show in town' to draw patrons, as they see it, from the SSPX, specifically. The 'indult', which seemed promising at first, has become a joke!
Joined: 31 May 2005 Posts: 1286 Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:14 am Post subject:
The Bishop is incorrect about the application of Ecclesia Dei. Ratzinger himself said that the Tridentine ought to be a rite along side all the others which completely flies in the face of the idea that it is only a pastoral prevision only for schismatics. I think I may write a letter to editor. Thanks for the heads up.
Its hard to believe that a man with such low intellect, and even lower integrity, could manage to get that many blatant falsehoods into one short letter to the editor.
Brian,
It's been an eventful week for you.
Judging Bishop Adamec based solely on what is written in his letter posted above, I wouldn’t say that he has a low intellect. I believe that he or whoever was the author of that letter is a devious and a very cunning individual and he/she achieved exactly what he/she wanted to achieve in writing it. That is – in response to your letter to the paper--the author wanted to mislead and intimidate Catholics who are currently attending Roman Catholic Churches in the Altoona diocese and who are concerned with the abuses in the liturgy. With this letter ostensibly from Bishop Adamec, those Catholics will be less inclined to jump ship and attend the Byzantine liturgy and, secondarily -- because of the bishop’s letter -- those who wanted the TLM in the diocese, are more inclined to abandon hope since he falsely says that it is only offered in response to SSPX chapels.
By now, I’m sure you’ve started to write your next letter to the paper. I would encourage you to focus on only two points in the Bishop’s letter and forget any direct or indirect mention of his lack of integrity. Funny that he mentions that he doesn’t want a debate. He has enough sense to know that he would be destroyed if he did debate anyone on the facts surrounding the decay within the Altoona Diocese.
Stick to the information from Rome which disputes his claim regarding the availability of the Latin Mass and you should also reference a definitive source that shows that Latin Catholics can attend Eastern Rite Masses and receive Holy Communion freely without permission from a bishop.
You could -- as a slight “gotcha†-- mention that Latin Catholics who choose to attend the Byzantine Liturgy can do so indefinitely not because they want to change rites, but only until the Catholic liturgy in Altoona is respectful, reverent and without abuses. You might say that you expect that this will be only a temporary change of venue and you pray that Roman Catholics will return to Roman Catholic Churches as soon as there is a new administration with a corresponding improvement in respect for the sacred liturgy in Altoona.
Keep in mind that your objective in your next letter is not to prove that the bishop is wrong. Your objective, as it was in the first letter, is to reach as many Catholics as you can with the truth. As you write your letter, remember that you are writing for the same audience that the Bishop wrote to and that target audience is not as well informed as we are at AQ. If you come off looking like a bad guy -- no matter how accurate your facts may be-- you will lose and he wins. Limit the subject matter, stick to the facts, avoid ad hominems, keep it clear and simple and I believe you will achieve your goal.
Good luck and I’m sure you will do a great job. If you like, post your letter here before you send it so we can take a look.
Joined: 29 Apr 2005 Posts: 17 Location: London, UK
Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2005 8:05 am Post subject: Re: Bishop Adamec disparages the Indult & the Latin Mass
Mad bishop wrote:
Those of our faithful who wish to be a part of another legitimate worship community on a regular basis, however, need to join and embrace that whole tradition, involving its spirituality and sacramental system.
There's more truth than he realizes in what he says. There's more to being a (traditional) Catholic than having access to the old Mass: one needs a whole traditional life - confession, the other sacraments, instruction, cathechesis, and a like-minded parish community. Therefore what he should be providing is, precisely, parishes completely free of the NO - not Masses here and there once in a while "to facilitate our return (sic)", but the possibility of traditional Christian life, all day, every day, on into the future, long after Bp Adamec has received the ultimate judgment on his pastoral sensitivity.
Joined: 01 Jun 2005 Posts: 4820 Location: Vatican City
Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:00 am Post subject: Novus Ordo?
The question I have for the Bishop is what exactly is the Novus Ordo and hasn't it been a root cause for division? With the Traditional Mass, at least before the Council, you could go from parish to parish and the Mass was the same (celebrated in a dead language with fixed traditional prayers and with priest and people facing East=unity). With the Novus Ordo, however, you go from parish to parish and each Mass has a different feel or character to it. You never know what to expect! And the laity will often approvingly respond by saying that "well, each priest has his own style." I am sure many of you here have often heard that statement since the 60's or 70's ad nauseam? But the Traditional Mass is not about personal style or the worldly innovations of lay members! It was and is Theocentric, not "community" centered, and free of endless options and innovations which are often found in the Novus Ordo and allows each priest to project his personality or style through the New Mass. That's divisive! The question: Who is saying Mass? is one that a lay person never asked in the 50's but is one that is often asked in 2005 in regard to the Novus Ordo and not the Traditional Mass.
I also wonder why the Amchurch bishops express concern over the so-called "divisiveness" of the Traditional Mass when, since 1965, they have expressed little or no concern over the divisiveness caused by the liturgical anarchy that took place in parishes when sanctuary after sanctuary, many being priceless works of art, was completely destroyed. Then they showed no concern when blasphemous liturgies such as the Clown Mass and Gay Mass became part of parish Mass schedules! But now they turn around and attack a small group of traditionalists who simply attend the Traditional Mass which is usually celebrated in poor churches located in obscure sections of a city and is hardly promoted! Strange times, indeed!
Joined: 01 Jun 2005 Posts: 4820 Location: Vatican City
Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2005 9:10 am Post subject: To Clarify
Let me clarify a point I had made. When I mentioned the Clown mass and gay mass, I didn't mean to imply that they were part of every parish Mass schedule, but that where they did appear, some bishops looked at them with a blind eye and failed to dissolve them. Other abuses and innovations have appeared since then such as the Charismatic Mass and its offshoot, the still canonically questionable Life Teen Mass, which have also plagued the Latin Rite and have caused division in Novus Ordo parishes.
Joined: 22 Mar 2005 Posts: 387 Location: Massachusetts
Posted: Sun Jun 12, 2005 2:43 pm Post subject: What's good for the goose is good for the gander!
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
To my knowledge, this is the first time in his 17 years as bishop that Adamec has personally written a letter to the editor on any issue in his diocese. ...
Two primary concerns of N.O. Bishops are money and control. Any migration of people to the Byzantine Church, a church he has no control over, would mean a loss of revenue.
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
St. Lazarus Old Catholic Church in Patton has been offering the traditional Latin Mass for some time now. It has drawn in local Catholics seeking reverent liturgies. But, unfortunately, St. Lazarus is a schismatic church, not in union with Rome. ... Locally, a wonderful option is available in the Divine Liturgy offered by numerous Byzantine Catholic churches. These churches are in full communion with the Pope, they have their own bishops, and their Masses are sacred, reverent and beautiful.
I think the best way to petition the Bishops is on the firm grounds of tradition and not the changing sands of discipline. If you ask for the indult you've already conceded that you had to ask in the first place. I would demand, as a God given right, that the Bishop supply a priest and a church building for the Traditional Roman Latin Mass as codified by Quo Primum, the Council of Trent and the tradition of the Church. At the least you would force him to say something that in all probability would abdicate his authority.
While the Bishops are demanding that WE be law abiding catholics I think it only fair that we remind the Bishops of the Laws of the Church, the current laws, in the 1983 code of canon law (my emphasis):
Canon 1248 -- The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.
Canon 844:2 -- Whenever necessity requires or genuine spiritual advantage suggests, and provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is lawful for the faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose churches these sacraments are valid.
This is about as loose as you can get and it is the law of the Church, above any priest, bishop, cardinal or even pope unless he decides to change it.
So according to the above canons a faithful catholic, as a matter of personal conscience, can go anywhere a valid catholic rite is said to satisfy his Sunday obligation, and he may even go to non-catholic ministers, i.e. Russian Orthodox, Eastern Rite or even the Old Catholics and a fortiori Byzantine churches, the SSPX or any other chapel where the traditional mass is said.
This is their own canon law. So by God's providence we, as traditional catholics, can rest assured that we are law abiding catholics because what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:13 pm Post subject: Re: What's good for the goose is good for the gander!
[quote="John314"]
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
St. Lazarus Old Catholic Church in Patton has been offering the traditional Latin Mass for some time now. It has drawn in local Catholics seeking reverent liturgies. But, unfortunately, St. Lazarus is a schismatic church, not in union with Rome. ... Locally, a wonderful option is available in the Divine Liturgy offered by numerous Byzantine Catholic churches. These churches are in full communion with the Pope, they have their own bishops, and their Masses are sacred, reverent and beautiful.
John314 wrote:
I think the best way to petition the Bishops is on the firm grounds of tradition and not the changing sands of discipline. If you ask for the indult you've already conceded that you had to ask in the first place. I would demand, as a God given right, that the Bishop supply a priest and a church building for the Traditional Roman Latin Mass as codified by Quo Primum, the Council of Trent and the tradition of the Church.
Lay Catholics in Adamec's diocese have petitioned, demanded, cajoled, begged, etc. Adamec does not obey Canon Law nor Vatican directives. I do not expect him to ever permit the Latin Mass, no matter what pressure, Vatican proof texts, or historical Church documents are brought to bear.
Therefore, my original letter to the editor was simply designed to catechize the local faithful that there ARE alternatives to Adamec's tyranny.
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:05 pm Post subject: Re: God bless you!
Dr. Brian Kopp wrote:
Therefore, my original letter to the editor was simply designed to catechize the local faithful that there ARE alternatives to Adamec's tyranny.
You are to be highly commended for your continued courageous efforts on behalf of our Catholic Faith, not to mention your staunch support of pre-born babies. Despite witnessing the carnage close-up, you've shown both temperance and wisdom in not succumbing to the snares of BLEEPS! and schismatics yet showing sensitivity to the SSPX and like-minded independents forced into an irregular status in these trying times.
Seems that the Bishop and his diocese has a problem with tradition in general, whether it be moral or liturgical.
I can confirm the information at that link; I was very much involved in that effort, and the site is owned by a former employee of the Altoona diocese, who also used to run www.diocesereport.com..
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2005 8:58 pm Post subject: Re: God bless you!
AskStPhilomena wrote:
Despite witnessing the carnage close-up, you've shown both temperance and wisdom in not succumbing to the snares of BLEEPS! and schismatics
The snares? That's uncalled for. The BLEEPS! operate out of goodwill, and wish only to confess God and His Church. Those with whom you would have them join do not. You miss his point. He's essentially saying that the bishop is in schism, that no matter what Rome would say, he would ignore Rome.
In addition, you can't speak of 'new church' and schism, in the same breath. The Feeneyites claim that any censure against them has been lifted, presumeably because 'new church' did not want to be seen as imposing sanctions. The Greek Orthodox, genuine schismatics, who historically did great harm to the faithful, are greeted not even as schismatic. And the same is true, as was pointed out in recent threads, of the schismatic Communist church, created by the Red Army. Those who are schismatic, are simply not treated so by 'new church'. If you confess 'new church', you simply can't use that word, anymore. So while I, as Catholic, can speak of those in schism, you cannot - not and be faithful to the new sect.
Joined: 31 May 2005 Posts: 1286 Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:24 pm Post subject:
diogenes wrote:
wide and generous<p>Bishop Joseph Adamec of Altoona, Pennsylvania, instructs the faithful-- in the unusual form of a Letter to the Editor of a local newspaper: <p>
Quote:
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has assured us bishops that the "traditional Latin Mass" is not to be considered as another rite that the faithful can choose at will. It has been allowed (with permission of the diocesan bishop) to facilitate the return of some to the Roman Catholic Church.
<p>
Let's be generous, and begin with what the bishop got <i>right</i>. It's true that the Vatican insists the traditional Latin Mass (we'll skip the scare quotes, if you don't mind) is not another rite, but a different form of the Latin rite. <p>
OK, now moving along to the inaccuracies: <p>
Bishop Adamec suggests that faithful Catholics cannot "choose at will" to attend the traditional Mass. That's true, to be sure, in a diocese where the bishop does not authorize a Tridentine Mass. (Want to guess anything about the Altoona diocese?) But the relevant 1991 directive from the Vatican instructs bishops to "facilitate the proper and reverent celebration of the liturgical rites according to the Roman Miss of 1962 wherever there is a genuine desire for this on the part of the priests and faithful." Thus if the faithful "choose at will," the bishop should oblige.
<p>
Technically the bishop's permission is <i>not</i> necessary; the Vatican <i>could</i> give permission directly. Again, from the same 1991 letter from the Ecclesia Dei commission:
Quote:
Although the Holy Father has given this Pontifical Commission the faculty to grant the use of the 1962 typical edition of the Roman Missal to all those who request it, while the Commission informs the appropriate Ordinary thereof, we would much prefer that such faculties be granted by the Ordinary himself for the sake of strengthening the bond of ecclesial communion between those priests and faithful and their local Pastors.
<p>
And don't miss that final phrase about helping people to "return" to the Roman Catholic Church-- with its astonishing implication that all those who prefer the Latin Mass have somehow been <i>outside</i> the Church! Again, the perspective from the Vatican is quite different; Cardinal Mayer of the Ecclesia Dei commission writes not about allowing the "return" of a few strays, but about "the rightful aspiractions of those who wish to worship according to the Latin liturgical tradition as celebrated for centuries."
with its astonishing implication that all those who prefer the Latin Mass have somehow been <i>outside</i> the Church! Again, the perspective from the Vatican is quite different;
Depending on how you look at. Surely you've read the various messages on the subject of the 'indult', on these threads, and its rather contemptible application as if 'new church' were simply attempting to put on a better show across the street, as if that is all Catholics were about. And of course, 'new order' is a lousy show, at that.
The Ecclesia Dei commission seems eager to shut the whole thing down. It failed to drive off or convert the underground, Catholicism. What's the point, then, they say?
Rather, one doesn't need any 'indult' to say The Mass. That permission is already given, in perpetuity, by The Church. It's redundant, and irrelevant, to seek a further permission from any bishop, who himself might be excommunicated for public and stubborn heresy.
As someone suggested, in another thread, the thing would be for a parish to find a priest willing to just offer The Holy Mass, within the organizational structure of 'new church', and then see how quickly and violently he would be denied by the bishop. Of course, the problem, there, is that no one would stand for The Church, within 'new church'. And the 'new church' parishioners, a clueless lot, would have no idea of the wickedness of the bishop in attempting to suppress that which is guaranteed for all time by God and His Church, and which act would according to the same document make him anathema and render him wholely outside The Church. But who would know, and who but the victims would say? You can see the mess. You can see the errors compounded, and from lack of humility, ignorance of the Faith, and lack of zeal and backbone for the things of God.
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 8:16 am Post subject: The English & Welsh situation
Should one not wish to travel too far to Mass, according the E & W Bishops' Conference "Guidelines", one can fullfil one's Sunday Duty by attendance at, wait for it, Anglican, Baptist, Methodist, United Reform, or presumably any other sect, church or chapel.
Recently in Menton in the South of France, I sought a Tridentine Mass - the nearest being Nice. Both an SSPX and an Indult Mass were available, both at 10:00, within two streets of oneanother. The main church in Menton is The Sacred Heart, not butchered, to any great extent, but Mass, if that it be, conducted in an entitrely alien way.
The "Guidelines" above may now be hidden from prying eyes, arising from howls of rage from various quarters.
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:13 am Post subject: Re: The English & Welsh situation
sixupman wrote:
Should one not wish to travel too far to Mass, according the E & W Bishops' Conference "Guidelines", one can fullfil one's Sunday Duty by attendance at, wait for it, Anglican, Baptist, Methodist, United Reform, or presumably any other sect, church or chapel.
They do seem to say just that. The very idea that they would suggest some virtue in attending a Methodist, say, service is assinine. This is 'new church', make no mistake. And the heresy is indifferentism. As this link is a document from some years ago, one can only assume they are stubborn in their 'new church' faith, and are outside The Church. They themselves, basically, might as well be Methodists.
Joined: 14 Jun 2005 Posts: 150 Location: Kinder, Louisiana, USA
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:32 am Post subject: Whatever the pope says is the law?
I guess if a pope tells us not to make the sign of the cross anymore because it might offend non-Catholics, then we must obey? If the pope says that now 2+2=5, then we must believe it?
Nonsense.
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:55 am Post subject: Re: The English & Welsh situation
sixupman wrote:
Recently in Menton in the South of France, I sought a Tridentine Mass - the nearest being Nice. Both an SSPX and an Indult Mass were available, both at 10:00, within two streets of oneanother.
Recently, after our church, St. Thomas More, Sanford, Florida was built, we had our mass at 4:30 pm and then heard an Indult was starting at 5:00 pm. I had heard in the past that this happens and it's so true. It seems they give the Indult only to take people away from the SSPX and not because they really are respecting the pleas of the faithful for the Latin Mass. One young man whose website is below who now goes to our church wanted the Indult at first but now, by the grace of God, understands what the SSPX has said all along about the Indult!
Joined: 24 Aug 2004 Posts: 1612 Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:31 am Post subject: Re: The English & Welsh situation
Dolorosa wrote:
sixupman wrote:
Recently in Menton in the South of France, I sought a Tridentine Mass - the nearest being Nice. Both an SSPX and an Indult Mass were available, both at 10:00, within two streets of oneanother.
Recently, after our church, St. Thomas More, Sanford, Florida was built, we had our mass at 4:30 pm and then heard an Indult was starting at 5:00 pm. I had heard in the past that this happens and it's so true. It seems they give the Indult only to take people away from the SSPX and not because they really are respecting the pleas of the faithful for the Latin Mass. One young man whose website is below who now goes to our church wanted the Indult at first but now, by the grace of God, understands what the SSPX has said all along about the Indult!
The current priest at St. Thomas More, Fr. Danel, used to be our pastor at the Immaculate Conception in Virginia Beach. He is an excellent priest, so we can be sure that St. Thomas More will have the best spiritual direction from this great alter Christus.
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 7:04 pm Post subject: Coming to a novus ordo parish near you
While badly abusing all those attached to the traditional Latin Mass, some bishops must be relishing the possibilities for priestless parishes...
http://www.cathnews.com/news/506/68.php
Joined: 22 Feb 2005 Posts: 1343 Location: Orlando, Florida
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:12 pm Post subject: Re: The English & Welsh situation
Dolorosa wrote:
sixupman wrote:
Recently in Menton in the South of France, I sought a Tridentine Mass - the nearest being Nice. Both an SSPX and an Indult Mass were available, both at 10:00, within two streets of oneanother.
Recently, after our church, St. Thomas More, Sanford, Florida was built, we had our mass at 4:30 pm and then heard an Indult was starting at 5:00 pm. I had heard in the past that this happens and it's so true. It seems they give the Indult only to take people away from the SSPX and not because they really are respecting the pleas of the faithful for the Latin Mass. One young man whose website is below who now goes to our church wanted the Indult at first but now, by the grace of God, understands what the SSPX has said all along about the Indult!
Yes, I did vouch for the indult. I knew in December about "plans" about an "indult" but I had no idea of the extent of them until later. I didn't completely agree with the SSPX position at the time (though I respected the priests and the who faithful presevered the Mass), but reading more in depht about what happened to the Society (in particular Archbishop Lefebvre) and the Catholic religion during and post Vatican II through books I couldn't believe what I was reading. I could go on and on, but we all know that feeling.
Combine that with many other things that went down and learning of the "divide and concur" position, I wanted no part of it. Along with liturgic abuse and with many comments from the indult bishop and the priest offering the Mass in Sanford (not about the Tridentine Mass, but on other matters), then I knew it was a ploy to reel people in. There is no way that I am ever again going to go to a Mass with a priest who praises the United Nations chapel (among other things) and uses "extraordinary ministers of the Holy Eucharist" when there are 150 people at Mass nor attend a Mass with a bishop who has altar girls and sees no problem with celebrating an Easter Mass nearly 3 weeks before Easter Sunday. The biggest joke of it all was when the priest was once preaching against racism in his homily once but his own "Polish club" website had plenty of racial and off color jokes (in Polish) on there for months after the homily (since then removed after I sent them an e-mail, but I still have copies of them through search engine cache). There are some other horrors, but I'll stop at that and pray for the priest to turn 100% traditional and not to just have an extra "Sunday gig." That truely would be a miracle and it has been done before.
I do not will to see this happen (their actions, not mine), but I'm here to save my soul and to serve God as best a lay person can (though we all fall short).
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:33 pm Post subject: Diocese ignoring directive from Rome
Johnstown Tribune Democrat
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Reader's Forum, Page B26
Diocese ignoring directive from Rome
Seventeen years ago, Pope John Paul II issued an apostolic letter titled "Ecclesia Dei" in which he gave his official approbation to Roman Catholics wishing to avail themselves of the traditional Latin Mass.
Notably, he said, "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition by a wide and generous application of these directives. I wish to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations."
In Bishop Adamec's June 11 letter, "Bishop: Letter may confuse faithful," he speaks as though "Ecclesia Dei" had never been written. Where is the "wide and generous" openness to the Latin Mass called for by John Paul II?
At what point will this directive from Rome be heeded?
Adamec's statement that the new order of Mass is the Mass that the pope (Benedict XVI) celebrates is misleading. In actuality, our current Holy Father has publicly celebrated the traditional Latin Mass several times in recent years, and has both written and spoken in various forums about the sublime spirituality it embodies.
In his book, "God and the World," Pope Benedict XVI says, "It is important to stop condemning the liturgical form (the traditional Latin Mass) valid until 1970. Those who currently intervene in favor of the validity of this liturgy or its practice are treated like lepers: All tolerance ends.
"This manner shows scorn and contempt to all the history of the Church. I do not understand why so many bishops submit themselves without a valid reason to this law of intolerance which opposes necessary reconciliations within the Church."
Two-thirds of America's dioceses, including six of eight in Pennsylvania, have approved and implemented the Latin Mass indult. Its ever widening implementation renders the situation in our diocese increasingly anomalous and leaves the rightful aspirations of a significant segment of the local Catholic population unaddressed.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
