To: gbcdoj; ninenot; BlackElk; ArrogantBustard; Dominick; Campion; St.Chuck
However, regardless of the gravity of the sacrilege, the New Mass still remains a sacrilege, and it is still in itself sinful. Furthermore, it is never permitted to knowingly and willingly participate in an evil or sinful thing, even if it is only venially sinful. For the end does not justify the means. Consequently, although it is a good thing to want to assist at Mass and satisfy one's Sunday obligation, it is never permitted to use a sinful means to do this. To assist at the New Mass, for a person who is aware of the objective sacrilege involved, is consequently at least a venial sin. It is opportunism. Consequently, it is not permissible for a traditional Catholic, who understands that the New Mass is insulting to Our Divine Savior, to assist at the New Mass, and this even if there is no danger of scandal to others or of the perversion of one's own Faith (as in an older person, for example), and even if it is the only Mass available.
linked above
I shake my head when I read the above and think about the "good Catholics" who'd be as happy as can be if one would just believe them when they whine: SSPX
isn't in schism! Is this garbage the encyclical wanna-be reading material for the schizzies and their fellow travelers? One might think that the father of lies
must be beaming about his handiwork hung so proudly at ess-ess-pee-ex dot org.
gbcdoj, I am grateful for the
sunlight is the the best disinfectant approach. :-) Thank you for your posting as well as the following:
there is never a necessity to ordain Bishops contrary to the will of the Roman Pontiff, Head of the College of Bishops. This would, in fact, imply the possibility of "serving" the church by means of an attempt against its unity in an area connected with the very foundations of this unity. (Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, Annexe to Prot.N. 5233/96)
49 posted on
07/15/2004 9:48:50 PM PDT by
GirlShortstop
(« O sublime humility! That the Lord... should humble Himself like this... »)
To: GirlShortstop; gbcdoj
I second that gbcdoj...
and the Pope did not sign any semi - Arian decree... I should know... ambiguous, yes... but not semi Arian.
52 posted on
07/15/2004 9:58:08 PM PDT by
Saint Athanasius
("I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born." - Ronald Reagan)
To: GirlShortstop
"Schizzies" huh.
You realize that this guy was sent for "psychlogical counseling"?
Are you married? If so, I pity your husband, I'd have to buy earplugs. You are hard to listen to woman.
62 posted on
07/15/2004 10:19:38 PM PDT by
AAABEST
(Lord have mercy on us)
To: GirlShortstop
You are wrong. There was a great necessity to ordain bishops contrary to this pope's wishes. And you are wrong. The Novus Ordo is a danger to the faith. Why do you suppose the Church is in its present moral and spiritual straits?
To: GirlShortstop
There's little question that Fr Zigrang went a bit too far, and is legitimately suspensu a divinis.
Too bad. Fiorino is a bad guy; if Zigrang had merely been obedient, his example would have been outstanding.
Now another several hundred gigabytes of desperate self-justification will emanate from the troglodyte schizzies...
108 posted on
07/16/2004 5:38:16 AM PDT by
ninenot
(Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
To: GirlShortstop
Ah, sublime hilarity! A girl shortstop in a Pink Palace.
306 posted on
07/16/2004 2:40:17 PM PDT by
Palladin
(Proud to be a FReeper!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson