FAQ 9 AM I OBLIGATED TO ATTEND THE NEW MASS AND SACRAMENTS? TRADITIO Traditional Roman Catholic Site E-mail: traditio@traditio.com, Web: http://www.traditio.com Copyright 1994-2002 CSM. Reproduction prohibited without authorization. Last Updated: 08/08/02 Frequently Catholics who are troubled by the New (Novus Ordo) Mass of Pope Paul VI ask whether they are required to attend this Mass and the new Sacraments, e.g., the Rite of Reconciliation (Penance). If Sacred Tradition of almost 2000 years weren't enough substantiation of every Catholics' inalienable right to the Traditional Latin Mass, Pope St. Pius V, in his solemn Papal Bull Quo Primum confirmed this Sacred Tradition ex cathedra and answered the question for all future time when he decreed: And in perpetuity We grant and permit that they may by all means use this Missal in singing or reciting Mass in any church whatsoever without any scruple of conscience, without incurring any penalties, sentences, or censures; in order that they may be able to do this and be able to use this Missal freely and lawfully, We, by virtue of Our Apostolic Office and by virtue of the present document, grant and permit this forever. Thus, the Traditional Latin Mass has been dogmatically defined as the principal rite of the Church, the Roman Rite of the Apostolic See. Even Pope Paul VI himself, when promulgating the New Mass, declared that the New Mass had no such authority: "The rite [of the New Mass] by itself is NOT a dogmatic definition" (Apostolic Constitution, "Missale Romanum," November 19, 1969). Further, when Pope Paul VI was asked by Cardinal Heenan of England if he was abrogating or prohibiting the Tridentine Mass, answered: "It is not our intention to prohibit absolutely the Tridentine Mass." More recently, Dario Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, made prefect of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" in April 2000 (Catholic Family News, April 2001, "Vatican Cardinal Admits Tridentine Mass 'Never Abrogated'"): "admitted reluctantly that the Tridentine [Traditional Latin] Mass has never been abrogated. The Cardinal said, 'Okey, we recognize that the old [Traditional Latin] Mass is not abrogated and is legitimate, but we cannot say it publicly because there will be too much of a rebellion, and difficulties with the bishops. We cannot say it publicly.'" This is indeed a startling public admission by cardinal. If the Traditional Latin Mass has not been abrogated, as even the Novus Ordinarians admit, it follows that all priests of the Roman Rite have had an immemorial right to celebrate that Mass without a purported "indult" from the pope or "special permission" from the local bishop, and that the Vatican has been playing a damnable game for the last 30+ years that has deprived Catholics of their right to the true Mass and priests of their right to celebrate only the true Mass. Any ecclesiastics, of whatever rank, who have, with deliberate deceit and malice, perpetrated such a fraud upon the Church, its clergy, and its faithful, would arguably come under the automatic excommunication provisions of Pope St. Pius V's Solemn Bull "Quo Primum." Moreover, there are several providential canons in the New (Novus Ordo) Code of Canon Law (1983) protect traditional Catholics in their practice of the Traditional Roman Catholic Mass, Sacraments, and Faith. Even though Traditional Catholics do not generally accept the new code, but instead observe the essence of the traditional code (issued in 1917 by Pope Benedict XV), from the perspective of the Novus Ordo apparatus, these new canons protect such Catholics against being molested by dioceses. In fact, these dioceses unjustly and without canonic authority frequently ignore, with prejudice, the provisions of these canons, just as they frequently ignore so many other canons. Canon 22. Makes it lawful for Catholics to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite (the Traditional Roman Rite) approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church (surely all the popes and councils of the Church) and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church (which the Traditional Roman Rite certainly is). Canon 214. Admits the "right" of Catholics to worship God according to the prescriptions of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church. The rite of Traditonal Catholics, the Traditional Roman Rite, was certainly approved by "legitimate pastors of the Church," from the earliest times to the present, most especially by Pope St. Pius V in Quo Primum (1570). Canon 844.2. Makes it lawful for any Catholic out of "necessity" or "genuine spiritual advantage" to seek out and attend (or celebrate in the case of a priest) the Traditional Latin Mass and other traditional Sacraments in churches or chapels that are not "recognized" by the diocese. Canon 923. The Christian faithful may take part in the Eucharistic Sacrifice and receive Communion in any Catholic rite.... Canon 1248.1. Allows the Mass obligation to be satisfied "by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite." Note that the location in this canon is not narrowly specified as it is elsewhere, e.g., "in an episcopally-approved church or oratory," but is left quite general: "anywhere." The Traditional Latin Mass is certainly a "Catholic rite," canonized by Sacred Tradition, as well as by many popes and councils. Canon 1248.2. For "grave cause," e.g., the moral impossibility that many Traditional Catholics have in conscience against attending a Novus Ordo service, this canon even recommends that one pray "personally or in a family or, as occasion offers, in groups of families." Canon 1323. A Catholic cannot be penalized for violating a law or precept (even when only apparent) if that person acted "out of grave fear, or only relatively grave, or out of necessity or out of serious inconvenience." Thus, Traditional Catholics who with certain conscience [canon 748] find it a serious inconvenience, that is, a moral impossibility, to attend a Novus Ordo service, are not validly subject to a penalty. If a pope, bishop, or other hierarch should attempt to penalize such a person, the penalty would be null and void. ======================================================================== In response to the question whether there is an obligation to attend the New Mass, a consulting canon lawyer wrote the following in the house organ of a conservative (not traditional) foundation specializing in the Novus Ordo (1983) canon law: Canonical Basics What's the law? What's the teaching? The Question: I am wondering when the obligation to attend Mass on Sundays and other holydays is no longer binding. I am a Catholic of the Roman rite, and I live in the USA. As you must be aware, there is a lot of diversity across this nation in liturgical practices, much of it illegitimate, and in my opinion most of it is unwise. I am trying to clarify where the line is that if a priest crosses it, I am not obliged to attend Mass.... How do I know when the "service" in question is a Mass that I must attend? I'm not trying to get out of attending Mass -- I'm glad to go. Nor am I asking how to know if a Mass is valid.... Must I attend a valid, but disrepectful Mass? Must I attend a valid Mass that is done in a way that contradicts Catholic doctrine...? I also don't understand why it is required to attend such Masses where the priest (and apparently much of the parish) is only formally in union with Rome, but materially appears to believe, act, and worship as Protestants in many ways, and yet it is wrong to attend a [non- diocesan] Mass in which the priest is offering Mass in a worthy manner.... I understand the importance of attending a Mass offered by a priest in union with Rome. But, when you see some of these Masses, you wonder who is in closer union with Rome -- the technically "Catholic" priest, or the [non-diocesan] priest. I'm very worried about my children, though.... Sure, I can tell them what to believe, but there's more to it than just intellectual belief -- I think proper worship of God needs to be experienced, and I don't know how to replicate that experience of reverence and awe at home. What they're experiencing is not what they would experience if we had reverent Masses, or if they would attend Mass at a [non-diocesan] church. This can't help but affect their faith. The Answer (by Our Consulting Canon Lawyer) According to Moral Theology, there are various "types" of impossibilities that inhibit a person from acting. One of these is called "moral impossibility" [incommodum grave]. Without begging the point, a moral impossibility exists when a person's conscience is so compromised by the situation that the personal believes it wrong to act in that situation. To reach this impossibility, one must carefully weigh the consequences against the obligations. Primarily, a big question is: when is one's salvation at stake? Phrased in another way: when does the situation begin to be an occasion of sin for the person morally compromised?... The answer to this question is difficult and varies form individual to individual. Christifideles, Lent 1997 (Vol. 15, No. 1, p. 3) [For the Traditional Catholic, it is hard to imagine any diocesan church in the USA (or elsewhere for that matter) that doesn't fit the description of the questioner. It is equally hard to imagine that the conscience of the traditional Catholic would not be so compromised by the New Mass that he would feel obliged to absent himself from that Mass and attend only the Traditional Latin Mass.]