Author Topic: The Crisis in the Church - an analogy (food for thought!) (Read 4818 times)

MaterDominici · « **Reply #15 on:** September 06, 2010, 11:29:26 PM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

(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.

BTW, I haven't heard any cheering about this from those who believe this is at the heart of the question of validity. Surely it is a good thing for hundreds of thousands to soon be receiving a valid Eucharist where none was present before?

SJB · « **Reply #16 on:** September 06, 2010, 11:36:47 PM »

I was speaking of certainly valid yet illicit rites that existed prior to Vatican II. Does that help?

SJB · « **Reply #17 on:** September 06, 2010, 11:41:48 PM »

Go back to Archbishop Lefebvre's statements on the new mass and sacraments. Those are closer to being a statement of the basis for the traditionalist resistance than anything you or I might say in 2010.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #18 on:** September 06, 2010, 11:52:21 PM »

Quote from: SJB

I was speaking of certainly valid yet illicit rites that existed prior to Vatican II. Does that help?

In understanding that we should be concerned about both validity and licitness, yes.

But, how does that apply to NO Eucharistic Adoration? I've not heard anyone argue that it's illicit before, so would that not just leave validity as the only concern in deciding whether or not to attend?

Quote from: SJB

Go back to Archbishop Lefebvre's statements on the new mass and sacraments. Those are closer to being a statement of the basis for the traditionalist resistance than anything you or I might say in 2010.

I'd say yes and no, but going with "yes" for the moment, do you know off hand precisely why he thought the NO to be doubtful? I don't, but just bought some big books on him and might just go look it up if you don't have a handy answer for me. : )

SJB · « **Reply #19 on:** September 06, 2010, 11:56:47 PM »

Quote

... a few years later many (but not all) of the SSPX priests started getting worldly, as wealth, human respect, etc. started going to their heads.

Who thinks this is what actually lead to Vatican II?