Latin “Mass” Problems

Q. What has been the ‘perennial problem’ with so-called ‘Traditional Catholics’ who, today, drive for 2 or more hours to attend a Latin Mass, no matter what the priest believes and no matter what missal he uses, because they know the true Faith is not being provided for in their local parishes?
A. This urge to “do something” has been a perennial problem. Consider, for instance, the Catholics on the old American frontier. Some were without priests and Holy Mass for many years. So, what did they do? They began to go to Protestant churches because they felt that they ought to “do something” instead of simply staying home, reading the Mass prayers, making devotions, reading a Catholic bible and teaching their children. Many of Father Arnold Damen’s missionary effort were to bring back these busy body apostate Catholics who had become Protestants because they felt that they had to “do something” instead of patiently waiting for the Church to send them Missionaries. Look at the trads of today. The way that they chase after this or that priest (cult of personality) or chapel; you would think that they were afraid of catching a disease by remaining in their own home.

Q. True or False: “Archbishop” Marcel Lefebvre and “Archbishop” Ngo Thuc signed THE most heretical decrees of Vatican II – the decree on Ecumenism and the decree on Religious Liberty.
A. True (sadly). Lefebvre is the Founder of the SSPX (fake Latin Mass Society within the counterfeit Vatican II ‘catholic’ church today which uses the 1962 missal of Freemason, Antipope John 23 and Thuc, who consecrated the ‘bishop’ of the CMRI, Spokane Washington. See Acta Synodalia Sacrosancti Concilii Oecumensi Vaticani II, pp. 863 & 867 and Volumen IV Pars VII pp. 809 & 812 (R. Lib).

Q. Does the CMRI & SSPX consider themselves one and the same?
A. Yes. The head of the CMRI admits it. “You know, it is not, the Thuc Bishops or the Lefebvre Bishops or the Thuc Priests or the Lefebvre Priests or this Group or that Group – we are Roman Catholic! It’s not this Society or that Society or this Community – we are Roman Catholic! And as such we work TogetherWe belong to the same Church.(From Video “Consecration” Sermon by Non-Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas of Non-Bishop Daniel Dolan in St. Gertrude the Great [Schismatic] Church on Nov. 30th, 1993)

Q. Is the SSG (St. Gertrude the Great) in communion with the CMRI?
Yes. The head of the CMRI, Pivarunas, “consecrated” the head of the SSG. Tony Cekada is the assistant “Pastor”.

“In 1989 ‘Fr.’ Dolan initiated contacts with the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen (CMRI). Subsequent discussions revealed agreement on major theological issues (the pope, the new sacraments).” (St. Gertrude the Great’s Official Website 02/02/09)

Q. Where do traditionalist and Anthony Cekada admit they have no office in the Church?
A. http://www.cmri.org/02-tradpriests.html
“Moreover, those of us who derive our orders from Abps. Lefebvre or Thuc obviously have no appointment to the cura animarum. But like all other priests, we are likewise obliged by divine law, in charity and in virtue of ordination, to provide ‘sacraments’ to the faithful who remain in grave common need.” Cekada explains cura animarum here: “This technical term [cura animarum] in canon law refers to priests who, by reason of their office or special title of jurisdiction, whether ordinary (a diocesan bishop, a superior general, a pastor or his equivalents) or delegated (coadjutor or assistant pastors) are obliged to “shepherd a particular part of Christ’s flock” (Merkelbach, Summa Theologiae Moralis3:86).”

Q. What is a Catholics Sunday obligation in these days of the long prophesied days of the cessation of the Holy Mass (Dan. 12:11)?
A. Based on his belief on the prescriptions and prohibitions found in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, Canon Law, and the encyclicals of the Church, takes very seriously the laws of the Catholic Church.  He does not seek to evade them on the pretext of the need for access to the Sacraments or the true Mass, particularly when to receive those sacraments, a justification of sorts must be made which is apart from, and in fact, in contravention to, the letter of the law.

 In so maintaining, and in assuming in the meantime the duties incumbent on Catholics to preserve the faith insofar as they are able, stay at home Catholics follow the laws and teachings of the Church by:

• proclaiming a firm and irrevocable assent to all the teachings of the Church and observance of Canon Law;

• refusing to receive doubtful sacraments;

• administering Baptism and Matrimony to each other and utilizing the Perfect Act of Contrition and Spiritual Communion in lieu of Penance and Holy Communion;

• reading either the entire Mass or the Mass of St. John from their missals, the appropriate Gospels and Epistles for the season and the sermons and instructions found in Goffines and elsewhere, keeping Sundays and holy days of obligation with prayers at home;

• in following only lawful pastors of the past (including the avoidance of any so-called and falsely styled “material” popes, also the conclavist imposters);

• in catechizing both children and adults;

• in professing their faith by defending it and

• by performing acts of reparation and penance as required by any censures they have incurred, according to Canon Law.

Q.  What is Mark Pivarunas’ stance on the scandal of Dolan and Cekada at St. Gertrude the Great (SSG)?
A. (From: 08/30/11): “The Heretical CMRI’s Boss, Mark Pivarunas, ‘Stance’ On The Ongoing Dolan & Cekada Scandal at SGG in Ohio”: A member of the Thuc church, Dr. Thomas Droleskey, publicly reported today that the leader of CMRI, Mark Pivarunas, revealed to him [Nov. of 2009] in multiple conversations that he (Pivarunas) KNEW that what was being reported (abuse of children) by alarmed/concerned people (which included the testimony of a Markus Ramolla) at Saint Gertrude the Great in Ohio was true. Dr. Droleskey noted that Pivarunas in the Fall of 2009 wanted it known that he (CMRI) would offer “sacraments” to those who already had, or would leave SGG who were: (exact quote of Pivarunas) “tired of the lies and rationalizations told repeatedly to justify the status quo” (at Dolan & Cekada’s SGG). Yet in perfect “heroic sedevacantist” form, Thuc “bishop” Mark Pivarunas made it clear to those reporting the abuse, that he could not take any public stand on the matter (corruption of youth) because his priests wanted to “avoid controversy.” Source: T.A. Droleskey News Article 

Q. Was there an apology by Dolan about the scandal at the SSG?
A. Here is the audio of “Bishop” Dolan apologizing about scandal of Marcus Romolla at the school at SSG and St. Clare in Columbus. He told Dolan not to ordain him, but Dolan did so anyway.

Q. Are there many “mentally ill” people who attend SSG?
A. It appears that there are. “Bishop” Dolan used The Lord Hath Done This to speak of the “mental illness” of at least some of those who are following the false “Father” Ramolla out of Saint Gertrude the Great Church, where many parishioners are fed up with having contracts held up over their heads to silence them about things they have seen with their own eyes that are contrary to the Catholic Faith and, quite possibly, in violation of the civil law.

Q.Does the CMRI consider themselves part of the same church as the SSPX?
A. Yes.  “You know, it is not, the Thuc Bishops or the Lefebvre Bishops or the Thuc Priests or the Lefebvre Priests or this Group or that Group – we are Roman Catholic! It’s not this Society or that Society or this Community – we are Roman Catholic! And as such we work Together. We belong to the same Church.” (From Video “Consecration” Sermon by Non-Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas of Non-Bishop Daniel Dolan in St. Gertrude the Great [Schismatic] Church on Nov. 30th, 1993. 

Q. What is a good website to learn more about Freemasonry with regards to the Church?
A. http://www.destroyfreemasonry.com/

Q. Is there a good link for looking at Ronacalli’s (John XIII’s ) Freemasonic connections?
A. http://www.opusdeialert.com/roncaliamason.htm

Q. Isn’t is true we could not say his Sacrament of Holy Orders is “invalid” due to the fact the Church even accepts the validity of the Orders of non-Uniate schismatic eastern rites?
A. According to Pope Pius XII’s papal election law, Vacantis Apostolica Sedis (VAS), while these bishops may be validly consecrated and appointed, (unlike Traditionalists), during an interregnum they still are unable to function as bishops until the election of a true pope, once the deadline for such an election has passed. “During the vacancy of the Apostolic See, regarding those things that pertained to the Sovereign Roman Pontiff while he lived, the Sacred College of Cardinals shall have absolutely no power or jurisdiction of rendering neither a favor nor justice or of carrying out a favor or justice rendered by the deceased Pontiff; rather, let the College be obliged to reserve all these things to the future Pontiff.1 Therefore, We declare invalid and void any power or jurisdiction pertaining to the Roman Pontiff in his lifetime, which the assembly of Cardinals might decide to exercise (while the Church is without a Pope), except to the extent to which it be expressly permitted in this Our Constitution…,” (and the cardinals are only allowed to decide things strictly pertaining to the election)… But if anything contrary to this prescript occurs or is by chance attempted, we declare it by Our Supreme authority to be null and void,” (paras.1- 3, Ch. 1, 1945; Acta Apostolica Sedis, Vol. XXXVIII, 1946, n. 3; pp. 65-99)Paragraph 109 of VAS repeats these same warnings, but applies them to anyone making an attempt to interfere with the election, changing of laws, violation of jurisdiction and Church rights, not just the cardinals.

It also must be remembered that in order to claim apostolic succession, the minister must possess both orders AND jurisdiction. “Even if valid orders exist, where jurisdiction is lacking there is no real apostolicity. Schism, as well as heresy, destroys apostolic succession,” (Rev. Thomas Cox, “Pillar and Ground of Truth,” 1900).

Q. What is the difference between the Traditionalists and the Old Catholics?
A. Remember two facts, the first Traditionalist bishop (Francis Schuckardt) was ordained by the Old Catholics. The second (Archbishop Lefebvre) in 1978 publicly welcomed an Old Catholic Bishop as his successor Bishop.

Q. Who were the Old Catholics?
A. Any of the groups of Western Christians who believe themselves to maintain in complete loyalty the doctrine and traditions of the undivided church but who separated from the see of Rome after the First Vatican council of 1869–70.

Q. Who are the Uniates?
A.They were the Eastern Catholic Churches or Oriental Catholic Churches, also called the Eastern-rite Catholic Churches, or simply the Eastern Churches. They were twenty-three Eastern Christian sui iuris (autonomous) particular churches of the Catholic Church, once in full communion with the true pope in Rome (now in communion with the false one)—Eastern Catholic Churches or Oriental Catholic Churches, also called the Eastern-rite Catholic Churches, or simply the Eastern Churches)

Q. If the uniates could once validly consecrate, then why can’t the Traditionalists do so today?
A. But this is an entirely different thing than the pope’s approval of their appointments to the episcopacy and his subsequent grant of jurisdiction. To hold that such approval is not necessary assumes that bishops receive their power directly from Christ apart from any “interference” with such power by the pope, and this is nothing more than a restatement of the Gallicanist heresy that prevailed during the Western Schism: “The superiority of the council to the pope, and the fallibility of the latter.”  The bishops in council, the Gallicanists held, were superior to the pope, and any bishop was his equal. Throughout the entire Traditionalist ordeal, one of the most glaring heresies taught by Traditional sects has been the assumption that a) a bishop validly ordained is may exercise his orders without papal permission, contrary to all that has ever been taught concerning apostolicity; and b) this is true because the bishop receives his jurisdiction directly from Christ upon consecration, just as Christ conferred it on the Apostles before His Ascension.

Q. Do you have a list of all the Freemason clergymen
A. The following is a list of Masons reprinted with some updates from the Bulletin de l’Occident Chrétien Nr.12, July, 1976, (Directeur Pierre Fautrad a Fye – 72490 Bourg Le Roi.) All of the men on this list, if they in fact be Masons, are excommunicated by Canon Law 2338. Each man’s name is followed by his position, if known; the date he was initiated into Masonry, his code #; and his code name, if known: Here

Q. VERY IMPORTANT: To think that a sect or a chapel, church, or group that is not infallible could be a better guide than THE Church that IS infallible is an example of one who has a _____________.
A. Poorly formed conscience, one that is doubtful or erroneous. For example, Groups like Mary’s Little Remnant run by the Schismatic, Richard Joseph Michael Ibrayni, has started a new ‘catholic’ religion and lives out in the desert in New Mexico. He is not infallible nor are groups like the CMRI or the SSPX. All of the teachings from these groups modify or change what the Catholic Church has always taught, therefore, when someone gives you directions to these places, DO NOT GO OUT TO THE DESERT! (Matthew 24:26), but just stay home and keep the true, pre-1950 Catholic Faith.

Q. What must necessarily be the ‘action’ taken by the Remnant Faithful today— in order to raise Holy Catholic families?
A. To make Holy Catholic families today, it takes a lot of guts (self-sacrifice) and by following the true faith, such mothers and fathers will naturally be led to make certain logical sacrifices, like renouncing bad movies and bad books, in order to have large families that are well behaved and holy who stand out and can do a lot of good with just being who they are as an example to others. The ONLY way this can occur is to resolve to learn and keep the true faith and remain HOME ON SUNDAYS, avoiding ALL chapels, but instead, have Father pray the true Canonized Mass at home (just reading but not consecrating which would be a sacrilege, and the Rosary recited with the family.

Q. True or False: The unity of the Church is not a union of sects.
A. True, for if one Church is true, all sects are false. Are all the Traditional Chapels and Traditional sects and the Novus Ordo churches one? Their only unity is that they all admit they are not unified and have no jurisdiction. Therefore, stay HOME and keep the true, pre-1950 Faith, keep ALL 10 Commandments, always wear your brown scapular, say the rosary every day, pray at home the true Canonized Latin Catholic Mass prayers of St. Pope Pius V and no other with your family (Fr. Lassance Daily Mass Missal 1945-1958 at daughtersofmarypress.com or joyfulcatholic.com), and have a True Devotion to our Blessed Mother. IF you do these things and persevere to the end, God promises you the reward of eternal life.

Q. Should we go to independent Chapels of independent priests or should we just stay home?
A. People never heed the warning about false Christs. They always think that their organization, their chapel, their priest is good and true. But they should consider that perhaps ALL of these saviors, messiahs, whatever might be frauds, yet they overlook the true Church which only reposes in those who stay home and don’t look for The Solution of the Month. We don’t have to hold out for that long. When our Lord returns, it will seem as if He had never gone away and we will laugh at how frightened and anxious we were.

Q. Why do good Catholics today STAY HOME on Sundays and Holy Days and have nothing to do with the perfidious Vatican II sect and its “priesthood” as well as all other independent, self-appointed “priests”?
A. Catholics are owed — by the Church — a certainty that their “sacraments” are valid and licit. That is accomplished through the integrity of the apostolic clerical hierarchy, but that has been in doubt, to an increasing degree, ever since the white smoke / black smoke of 1958 and the apparent election of Giolly Gianni Roncalli. I’ve seen nothing since then to resolve my reasonable doubts, so I stay home. YOU SHOULD TOO since Catholics are forbidden to take doubtful Sacraments from anyone, especially men who are not sent by a mandate of a true Pope, but have sent themselves.

Q. Should we go to independent Chapels of independent priests or should we just stay home?
A. People never heed the warning about false Christs. They always think that their organization, their chapel, their priest is good and true. But they should consider that perhaps ALL of these saviors, messiahs, whatever might be frauds, yet they overlook the true Church which only reposes in those who stay home and don’t look for The Solution of the Month. We don’t have to hold out for that long. When our Lord returns, it will seem as if He had never gone away and we will laugh at how frightened and anxious we were.

Q. What body of men, women, and children in the Catholic Church before 1958 ever heard of ‘the Traditionalist Movement’ or the ‘Novus Ordo’ ?
A. No one because they are not legitimate rites of God’s one true Church—the point is that all these sects who call themselves ‘Catholic’ are not Catholic – Stay away from all of them and stay HOME and keep the pre-1950 authentic Catholic Faith as contained, for example, in the Penny Catechism.

Q. Is the the insertion of the name of a false pope into the Canon of the Mass — not actually the Consecration per se, but the actual Canon, nevertheless — a definite indication that all are in union with whatever “papal” name is inserted.
A. Yes. He begins by noting the actual wording of this portion of the Canon: “…which in the first place we offer up to Thee for Thy holy Catholic Church, that it may please Thee to grant her peace, to protect, unite and govern throughout the world, together with [una cum] Thy servant N. our Pope, N. our Bishop, and all true believers and professors of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith.” In Latin the phrase together with is rendered by una cum.

Pope Benedict XIV: But whatever can be said about this controverted point of ecclesiastical learning, it is sufficient for us to be able to affirm that the commemoration of the Roman Pontiff in the Mass as well as the prayers said for him in the Sacrifice are considered to be, and are a certain declarative sign, by which the same Pontiff is recognized as the head of the Church, the Vicar of Christ, and the Successor of Saint Peter, and becomes of profession of a mind and will firmly adhering to Catholic unity…”

Q. Is Donald Sanborn a true bishop?
A. No. Sanborn holds that one who is at the very least suspected of heresy can validly obtain the papal office. Apostate Thuc-to-de Lauriers-to-McKenna-to Sanborn (former SSPXer-LeFebvre). Even if valid orders exist, where jurisdiction is lacking there is no real apostolicity.

Q. Did Thuc have extraordinary powers to consecrate without a pope?
A. No. Below are the standard instruction to Bishops. No extraordinary papal powers. I even provided a translation.


Q. What is the  difference between the sacrament and the sacrifice? Is there a true sacrifice outside the Church? 
A. There is no true sacrifice outside the Catholic church. I have said over and over again, in the words of St. Thomas, which many reject. Again for anyone reading this. “On the contrary, Augustine says (Contra Parmen. ii): “Just as Baptism remains in them,” i.e. in heretics, schismatics, and those who are excommunicate, “so do their orders remain intact.” Now, by the power of his ordination, a priest can consecrate the Eucharist. Therefore, it seems that heretics, schismatics, and those who are excommunicated, can consecrate the Eucharist, since their orders remain entire. I answer that, some have contended that heretics, schismatics, and the excommunicate, who are outside the pale of the Church, cannot perform this sacrament. But herein they are deceived, because, as Augustine says (Contra Parmen. ii), “it is one thing to lack something utterly, and another to have it improperly”; and in like fashion, “it is one thing not to bestow, and quite another to bestow, but not rightly.” Accordingly, such as, being within the Church, received the power of consecrating the Eucharist through being ordained to the priesthood, have such power rightly indeed; but they use it improperly if afterwards they be separated from the Church by heresy, schism, or excommunication. But such as are ordained while separated from the Church, have neither the power rightly, nor do they use it rightly. But that in both cases they have the power, is clear from what Augustine says (Contra Parmen. ii), that when they return to the unity of the Church, they are not re-ordained, but are received in their orders. And since the consecration of the Eucharist is an act which follows the power of order, such persons as are separated from the Church by heresy, schism, or excommunication, can indeed consecrate the Eucharist, which on being consecrated by them contains Christ’s true body and blood; BUT THEY ACT WRONGLY, AND SIN BY DOING SO; AND IN CONSEQUENCE THEY DO NOT RECEIVE THE FRUIT OF THE SACRIFICE, WHICH IS SPIRITUAL SACRIFICE…THEY CAN INDEED CONSECRATE THE EUCHARIST, WHICH ON BEING CONSECRATED BY THEM CONTAINS CHRIST’S TRUE BODY AND BLOOD AND SIN BY DOING SO, AND IN CONSEQUENCE DO NOT RECEIVE THE FRUIT OF THE SACRIFICE…”  Go here.

Q. Can a Catholic receive the sacraments at the hand of a heretic?
A. No.

Q. Can heretics, schismatics, and excommunicated persons consecrate the Eucharist? Some say It seems that heretics, schismatics, and excommunicated persons are not able to consecrate the Eucharist. Others say, heretics and the like cannot consecrate the Eucharist. And there are those who say that those who are outside the Church, such as those who are heretics, schismatics, and excommunicate, are not able to consecrate the Eucharist.
A. Yes, they have the power. No, they do not have the power to use it lawfully. They have the power, but use it improperly.

This question and answer assume we are discussing men within the Church who received the power of consecrating through being ordained to the priesthood.  If any of this is not the case then this answer does NOT apply.  If all of this is the case, then St Thomas provides the Church’s answer on the question. He writes:

“On the contrary, Augustine says (Contra Parmen. ii): “Just as Baptism remains in them,” i.e. in heretics, schismatics, and those who are excommunicate, “so do their orders remain intact.” Now, by the power of his ordination, a priest can consecrate the Eucharist. Therefore, it seems that heretics, schismatics, and those who are excommunicate, can consecrate the Eucharist, since their orders remain entire.

I answer that, some have contended that heretics, schismatics, and the excommunicate, who are outside the pale of the Church, cannot perform this sacrament. But herein they are deceived, because, as Augustine says (Contra Parmen. ii), “it is one thing to lack something utterly, and another to have it improperly”; and in like fashion, “it is one thing not to bestow, and quite another to bestow, but not rightly.” Accordingly, such as, being within the Church, received the power of consecrating the Eucharist through being ordained to the priesthood, have such power rightly indeed; but they use it improperly if afterwards they be separated from the Church by heresy, schism, or excommunication. But such as are ordained while separated from the Church, have neither the power rightly, nor do they use it rightly. But that in both cases they have the power, is clear from what Augustine says (Contra Parmen. ii), that when they return to the unity of the Church, they are not re-ordained, but are received in their orders. And since the consecration of the Eucharist is an act which follows the power of order, such persons as are separated from the Church by heresy, schism, or excommunication, can indeed consecrate the Eucharist, which on being consecrated by them contains Christ’s true body and blood; but they act wrongly, and sin by doing so; and in consequence they do not receive the fruit of the sacrifice, which is a spiritual sacrifice.” (Q. 82, Article 7)

Q. Does a man who is ordained while separated from the Church, have the power of consecrating rightly, or do they use it rightly?
A. No. “But such as are ordained while separated from the Church, have neither the power rightly, nor do they use it rightly.” They do, however, have the power; just not rightly nor do they use it rightly.

Q. Does a man who is separated from the Church by heresy, schism or excommunication who received the power of consecrating the Eucharist, use it properly?
A. No. they neither have the power rightly, nor use it rightly.

Q. Can a person who possesses the power of order but is separated from the Church able to consecrate the Eucharist?
A. Yes. If they possessed the power of order

Q. Does a person who possesses the power of order but is separated from the Church able to consecrate the Eucharist rightly?
A. No.

Q. Does a person who possesses the power of order but is separated from the Church able to consecrate the Eucharist so as to receive the fruit of the sacrifice?
A. No.

Q. What is it that the person who possesses the power of order, but is separated from the Church, NOT ABLE to receive when he consecrates the Eucharist?
A. The fruit of the sacrifice, which is a spiritual sacrifice.

Q. Outside the Church is does the one who consecrates offer a spiritual sacrifice that is a true sacrifice with the truth of its fruit, although it be a true sacrifice. “Hence outside the Church there can be no spiritual sacrifice that is a true sacrifice with the truth of its fruit, although it be a true sacrifice with the truth of the sacrament; thus it was stated above (III:80:3), that the sinner receives Christ’s body sacramentally, but not spiritually.” St. Thomas (Q. 82, Art. 7)
A. No.

Q. Can those outside the Church lawfully confer any sacrament other than baptism?
A. No. “Baptism alone is allowed to be conferred by heretics, and schismatics, because they can lawfully baptize in case of necessity; but in no case can they lawfully consecrate the Eucharist, or confer the other sacraments.” (Ibid)

Q. Do the prayers of the priest who is outside the Church who celebrates the mass have efficacy (an effect)?
A. No. “The priest, in reciting the prayers of the mass, speaks instead of the Church, in whose unity he remains; but in consecrating the sacrament he speaks as in the person of Christ, Whose place he holds by the power of his orders. Consequently, if a priest severed from the unity of the Church celebrates mass, not having lost the power of order, he consecrates Christ’s true body and blood; but because he is severed from the unity of the Church, his prayers have no efficacy.” (Ibid)

Q. Is it permissible to receive communion from heretical, excommunicate, or sinful priests, and to hear mass said by them? It seems to some that one ought not to refrain from receiving Communion at their hands, or from hearing their mass. It seems to them that whoever belongs to His mystical body can communicate in their sacrifices. That is, is it lawful to receive Communion from the hand of a heretic?
A. No! “I answer that, As was said above (Article 5,Article 7), heretical, schismatical, excommunicate, or even sinful priests, although they have the power to consecrate the Eucharist, yet they do not make a proper use of it; on the contrary, they sin by using it. But whoever communicates with another who is in sin, becomes a sharer in his sin. Hence we read in John’s Second Canonical Epistle (11) that “He that saith unto him, God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works.” Consequently, it is not lawful to receive Communion from them, or to assist at their mass.” (Q 82, Article 9)

Q. Are heretics forbidden to perform the Eucharistic rite?
A. Yes. Still there is a difference among the above, because heretics, schismatics, and excommunicates, have been forbidden, by the Church’s sentence, to perform the Eucharistic rite. (ibid)

Q. What happens to those who receive the sacraments from heretics?
A. They sin! “And therefore whoever hears their mass or receives the sacraments from them, commits sin. (Ibid)

Q. What about those who are sinners but not yet suspended in regard to others by any ecclesiastical sentence? Is it lawful for one to receive Communion at the hands of a sinner upon whom the Church has not pronounced a sentence?
A. “Until the Church’s sentence is pronounced, it is lawful to receive Communion at their hands, and to hear their mass.” (ibid) Notice, here the teaching pertains to “sinners”, not to heretics or apostates or excommunicates. From those men, the Church teaches it is unlawful to receive Communion. If, however, it is clear the man is a sinner, then the story is different. “On the contrary, The Canon says (Dist. 32): “Let no one hear the mass of a priest whom he knows without doubt to have a concubine.” Moreover, Gregory says (Dial. ii.) that “the faithless father sent an Arian bishop to his son, for him to receive sacrilegiously the consecrated Communion at his hands. But, when the Arian bishop arrived, God’s devoted servant rebuked him, as was right for him to do.” (Ibid)

Q. Does one shun, avoid, resist, disobey, refuse Communion by refusing to hear the masses of such priests, or to receive Communion from them?
A. No! “By refusing to hear the masses of such priests, or to receive Communion from them, we are not shunning God’s sacraments.” (Ibid)

Q. What do we shun by refusing to receive Communion from heretics?
A. We shun is the sin of the unworthy ministers. (ibid)

Q. Are those who are true Catholics in the unity of the Faith able to receive the sacrament of the Eucharist / Communion from the dispensing of heretics.
A. No! “Those who belong to the unity of the Faith are not to receive the sacrament from their dispensing.” (ibid)

Translate »