Author Topic: The Crisis in the Church - an analogy (food for thought!) (Read 4823 times)

MaterDominici · « **Reply #10 on:** September 06, 2010, 08:40:18 PM »

Quote from: Recusant

Quote from: MaterDominici
Quote from: Recusant
Quote from: Matthew
Those who believe the Novus Ordo is invalid should be able to say exactly WHY -- and "Ick!" isn't a good enough reason.

Why? Because it is based on a lie. Our Lord did not say "for all" He said "for many" and popes, doctors and catechisms have explained why "for many" MUST be used.

And so you would agree that a Latin NO is valid? ...and that ALL NO Masses will be valid when the new translations are implemented next year??

Validity could be possible in the cases you mention but for various reasons you would compromise your faith by assisting at such a Mass.

Yes, but as this conversation was a spin-off (in case you didn't know) of the question of whether or not we should go to Adoration at a NO church, the primary issue is validity of the consecration.

SJB · « **Reply #11 on:** September 06, 2010, 09:36:26 PM »

Quote

... the primary issue is validity of the consecration.

There are more "primary issues" than just validity.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #12 on:** September 06, 2010, 09:45:15 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote
... the primary issue is validity of the consecration.

There are more "primary issues" than just validity.

What would be another issue affecting whether or not one should attend Eucharistic Adoration at a NO church other than validity of the consecration?

SJB · « **Reply #13 on:** September 06, 2010, 10:54:35 PM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

Quote from: SJB
Quote
... the primary issue is validity of the consecration.

There are more "primary issues" than just validity.

What would be another issue affecting whether or not one should attend Eucharistic Adoration at a NO church other than validity of the consecration?

It should be obvious that validity alone cannot be the sole reason for attendance at a Eucharistic Adoration, as there are valid but illicit sacraments available in various places. While it is true that the Church has pronounced on these illicit sacraments, yet it is also true that the Church has pronounced on the validity of these illicit sacraments as She allows those in danger of death to be associated with them in a very specific situation.

The Novus Ordo is to be avoided because it is doubtful. This is the entire basis for the traditionalist resistance of the new sacraments.

The beginning "analogy" is horrible, btw.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #14 on:** September 06, 2010, 11:27:00 PM »

Quote from: SJB

It should be obvious that validity alone cannot be the sole reason for attendance at a Eucharistic Adoration, as there are valid but illicit sacraments available in various places. While it is true that the Church has pronounced on these illicit sacraments, yet it is also true that the Church has pronounced on the validity of these illicit sacraments as She allows those in danger of death to be associated with them in a very specific situation.

Considering the audience on this site, I don't think many are concerned with whether or not the sacrament was licit. Unless you're trying to say that the NO is illicit in which case please feel free to explain.

Quote from: SJB

The Novus Ordo is to be avoided because it is doubtful. This is the entire basis for the traditionalist resistance of the new sacraments.

I avoid the NO not because I doubt it's validity or licitness, but rather because it is inferior to the TLM and usually harmful to souls. This coupled with abuses of the rite is plenty of reason to stay away. It's primarily the SV viewpoint that believes the NO to be doubtfully valid and certainly is NOT the "entire basis for traditionalist resistance".

I ask you, though, why you think the NO to be doubtful. So far we have (1) invalid ordinations, which does not apply to all NO Masses and (2) improper wording, which in the example cited does not apply to Latin Masses and will be rectified in all English Masses late next year.