Author Topic: Is it a sin to miss a N.O. mass? (Read 2118 times)

TCat · « **on:** August 05, 2013, 09:45:22 AM »

The only church in my town is novus ordo. Though the service is at times ultra liberal and protestant, it is still a valid eucharist...

....right?

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #1 on:** August 05, 2013, 10:28:20 AM »

Even if it was a valid Eucharist, (and cases can be made against that) the transubstantiation is not achieved within a Catholic liturgy. The Orthodox have a valid Eucharist, but we do not attend their liturgies because they are not Catholic (in truth, the Orthodox Divine Liturgy is probably *more* Catholic than the NO). A valid Eucharist could be confected at a black Satanic mass presided over by a validly ordained priest, as well.

Certainly not a sin to not attend a non-Catholic liturgy. In fact, we are commanded to stay away.

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #2 on:** August 05, 2013, 10:43:02 AM »

Anybody who answers this is giving their personal opinion only. Might be a sin to attend, might be a sin to not attend. The Church is in such chaos that there is no one with sufficient authority and doctrinally sound enough to give an answer that carries real weight.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #3 on:** August 05, 2013, 11:48:39 AM »

.

Quote from: TCat

The only church in my town is novus ordo. Though the service is at times ultra liberal and protestant, it is still a valid eucharist...

....right?

That's a loaded question!

Quote from: MiserereMeiDeus

Anybody who answers this is giving their personal opinion only. Might be a sin to attend, might be a sin to not attend. The Church is in such chaos that there is no one with sufficient authority and doctrinally sound enough to give an answer that carries real weight.

Really?

So nobody has any jurisdiction anymore?
Or, there are no more valid priests?
Or, nobody now knows what the Church teaches?
Or, you can't trust anyone to give you the truth?
Or, if you get an answer you don't like you can disregard it?

What if Bishop Williamson were to answer this question?
Would his answer be merely a personal opinion?
Or, what if Fr. Pfeiffer or Fr. Hewko or Fr. Chazal or Fr. Ringrose answered it?
What if all the priests who met for the Silver Anniversary celebration on June
29th in Vienna, VA were to convene again and answer this question -- would
that just be their own, personal opinion, too?

What if another Ecuмenical Council were convened with the purpose of
answering this question -- Vatican III: Is the Eucharist validly consecrated at
the Newmass plethora of Eucharistic Prayers?

Would that be their personal opinion?

Your answer sounds like the kind of thing you'd hear at a sedevacantist
rap session... but you wouldn't hear it from the pulpit, most likely. What
you hear from the pulpit is stuff like, "See how terrible things are, and what
new and abominable false teachings are being handed down even from the
papacy? How can these men be Catholic? How can they not be heretics?
And how can a heretic be the Pope?"

Mabel · « **Reply #4 on:** August 05, 2013, 11:58:28 AM »

This is how I deal with it, those who said that no one has the power to bind another are correct:

It is a sin to participate in a rite unapproved by the Church. I cannot and do not believe that the Church would give us such a rite, that it comes from an imposter. I argue that If you believe that the NO was given by the Church, you also believe that the Church can give a rite harmful to souls.

Since I don't believe that the NO was a rite given by the Catholic Church, I may not participate in it nor do I sin by missing it. I would sin by actively assisting at the NO and praying with those who do not hold the Catholic Faith. (I'm not saying everyone or anyone in the pew at the NO is a heretic, but often the ministers of the service are public heretics)

MyrnaM · « **Reply #5 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:01:15 PM »

Is it a sin to forgo a Protestant service? Same thing here.

Matthew · « **Reply #6 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:12:46 PM »

Quote from: TCat

The only church in my town is novus ordo. Though the service is at times ultra liberal and protestant, it is still a valid eucharist...

....right?

No, and no.

It sounds like it might be invalid.

Some people might go too far and think invalidity is a disease that any Mass can catch like a common cold, but it's also erroneous to think that no Mass can be invalid.

Most trads, when they speak about Novus Ordo Masses being valid or invalid, exclude the infamous "clown masses" and other extreme liberal examples.

I think those examples ARE invalid. Often the wrong matter is used at consecration, the words of consecration are wrong, etc.

At any rate, such a service is blasphemous, in a way that the "typical" N.O. service is not.

Yes, the typical N.O. has protestant overtones and plenty of problems, but the liberal specimens are especially heinous and dangerous to the Faith. Whereas it's possible for a few souls at a typical N.O. service to keep the Faith by reading tons of TAN books in their spare time, it's NOT possible with a liberal service as you describe.

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #7 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:20:09 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.
Quote from: TCat
The only church in my town is novus ordo. Though the service is at times ultra liberal and protestant, it is still a valid eucharist...

....right?

That's a loaded question!

Quote from: MiserereMeiDeus
Anybody who answers this is giving their personal opinion only. Might be a sin to attend, might be a sin to not attend. The Church is in such chaos that there is no one with sufficient authority and doctrinally sound enough to give an answer that carries real weight.

Really?

So nobody has any jurisdiction anymore?
Or, there are no more valid priests?
Or, nobody now knows what the Church teaches?
Or, you can't trust anyone to give you the truth?
Or, if you get an answer you don't like you can disregard it?

What if Bishop Williamson were to answer this question?
Would his answer be merely a personal opinion?
Or, what if Fr. Pfeiffer or Fr. Hewko or Fr. Chazal or Fr. Ringrose answered it?
What if all the priests who met for the Silver Anniversary celebration on June
29th in Vienna, VA were to convene again and answer this question -- would
that just be their own, personal opinion, too?

What if another Ecuмenical Council were convened with the purpose of
answering this question -- Vatican III: Is the Eucharist validly consecrated at
the Newmass plethora of Eucharistic Prayers?

Would that be their personal opinion?

Your answer sounds like the kind of thing you'd hear at a sedevacantist
rap session... but you wouldn't hear it from the pulpit, most likely. What
you hear from the pulpit is stuff like, "See how terrible things are, and what
new and abominable false teachings are being handed down even from the
papacy? How can these men be Catholic? How can they not be heretics?
And how can a heretic be the Pope?"

I guess CI is now for all practical purposes a sedevacantist forum.

Bishop Williamson thinks the Conciliar popes are still popes, just bad popes. That should give them some kind of authority.

Matto · « **Reply #8 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:30:56 PM »

I do not think it is a sin to miss a Novus Ordo Mass because I think a Novus Ordo Mass is displeasing to God instead of pleasing to him. On most holy days of obligation, I don't have an SSPX Mass to attend, so I stay home instead of going to the Novus Ordo near my house. But I am only a layman so my opinion holds little weight.

TCat · « **Reply #9 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:36:10 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: TCat
The only church in my town is novus ordo. Though the service is at times ultra liberal and protestant, it is still a valid eucharist...

....right?

No, and no.

It sounds like it might be invalid.

Some people might go too far and think invalidity is a disease that any Mass can catch like a common cold, but it's also erroneous to think that no Mass can be invalid.

Most trads, when they speak about Novus Ordo Masses being valid or invalid, exclude the infamous "clown masses" and other extreme liberal examples.

I think those examples ARE invalid. Often the wrong matter is used at consecration, the words of consecration are wrong, etc.

At any rate, such a service is blasphemous, in a way that the "typical" N.O. service is not.

Yes, the typical N.O. has protestant overtones and plenty of problems, but the liberal specimens are especially heinous and dangerous to the Faith. Whereas it's possible for a few souls at a typical N.O. service to keep the Faith by reading tons of TAN books in their spare time, it's NOT possible with a liberal service as you describe.

If it is solemn enough, like between Monday - Friday then it might be valid, but it gets "less solemn" at the weekends. It only gets crazy heretical on rare occasions, but I have learned that if the words of consecration are not said in a certain format it is invalid. I have got up and walked out of masses before because I didn't think it was done in the way that makes it valid. Usually when it gets crazy liberal I leave, but it never reaches the horrors seen in youtube examples of liturgical abuse.

It almost like one's opinion on whether Vatican 2 is valid determines whether you think the new mass is valid. It is possible that the faith has been reduced to a remnant and that the mainstream "church" is not Catholic, but perhaps there are degrees of Catholicity and the mainstream is still the church and the new mass is still a mass, I don't know but will research this topic further.

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #10 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:38:51 PM »

And if Bishop Williamson were to give his opinion (and he frequently does) but it turns out to be dead wrong because R&R is not a viable option and the sedevacantists were right all along, where does that leave even Resistance trads? Or if he's right, where does that leave the sedevacantists? Are they in schism, and damned? Both camps are opposed to the NO, and both advise against it for different reasons, but if anybody on this forum points to ANYBODY and claims that that person undoubtedly has jurisdiction, there are plenty more on this forum who will disagree, and present pretty good reasons for their position.

I agree that it's more likely than not a sin to attend the NO even if there is no other alternative, but I don't agree that it's de fide.

I mean, GET REAL. We have tradition to guide us, but we are living in unprecedented times. Anybody who is positive they've got it all figured out is probably being presumptuous. Was it a sin to attend a Mass during the 4th century when most of the "Church" was Arian? It would be interesting to know. It could be argued that those Masses were not valid because many priests did not intend to do what the Church intended. Can anybody provide docuмented information on whether it was ever declared formally a sin for people to go to "Mass" then?

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #11 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:39:37 PM »

Quote from: MiserereMeiDeus

Quote from: Neil Obstat
.
Quote from: TCat
The only church in my town is novus ordo. Though the service is at times ultra liberal and protestant, it is still a valid eucharist...

....right?

That's a loaded question!

Quote from: MiserereMeiDeus
Anybody who answers this is giving their personal opinion only. Might be a sin to attend, might be a sin to not attend. The Church is in such chaos that there is no one with sufficient authority and doctrinally sound enough to give an answer that carries real weight.

Really?

So nobody has any jurisdiction anymore?
Or, there are no more valid priests?
Or, nobody now knows what the Church teaches?
Or, you can't trust anyone to give you the truth?
Or, if you get an answer you don't like you can disregard it?

What if Bishop Williamson were to answer this question?
Would his answer be merely a personal opinion?
Or, what if Fr. Pfeiffer or Fr. Hewko or Fr. Chazal or Fr. Ringrose answered it?
What if all the priests who met for the Silver Anniversary celebration on June 29th in Vienna, VA were to convene again and answer this question -- would that just be their own, personal opinion, too?

What if another Ecuмenical Council were convened with the purpose of
answering this question -- Vatican III: Is the Eucharist validly consecrated at
the Newmass plethora of Eucharistic Prayers?

Would that be their personal opinion?

Your answer sounds like the kind of thing you'd hear at a sedevacantist rap session... but you wouldn't hear it from the pulpit, most likely.

What you hear from the pulpit is stuff like:

"See how terrible things are, and what new and abominable false teachings are being handed down even from the papacy?

How can these men be Catholic? How can they not be heretics?

And how can a heretic be the Pope?"

I guess CI is now for all practical purposes a sedevacantist forum.

You said anyone who answers this is merely giving their
own personal opinion. I disagree. I think that members
post here after having been well informed by one or more
good priests, and/or by diligent study of their own, but
necessarily under the guidance of a priest at some point.

Sorry, I'm not sure if you're trying to be sarcastic or what.
I don't think CI is a sede forum. But it could turn into one
in the future, especially the way things are going in Rome!

Did you notice the beach ball and jersey were placed on a
TRADITIONAL ALTAR, not a Newfangled altar?

Quote

Bishop Williamson thinks the Conciliar popes are still popes, just bad popes. That should give them some kind of authority.

And........this means what, you do not think they're popes?
Or you prefer to be ambiguous about what you believe, just
to kick sarcasm around like a beach ball next to the tabernacle?

Or, make that a soccer ball on a soccer field.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #12 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:42:20 PM »

TCat, did you read my post?

The validity of the NO is ultimately a non-issue, since the rite itself is not Catholic, but ecuмenical. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a sacrifice. The Novus Ordo Missae has eliminated all aspects of a sacrifice. Even if your Novus Ordo was done in Latin with incense facing east twice a day seven days a week, it still wouldn't be Catholic.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #13 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:46:42 PM »

Quote from: TCat

The only church in my town is novus ordo. Though the service is at times ultra liberal and protestant, it is still a valid eucharist...

....right?

NO!

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #14 on:** August 05, 2013, 12:47:47 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

And........this means what, you do not think they're popes?
Or you prefer to be ambiguous about what you believe, just
to kick sarcasm around like a beach ball next to the tabernacle?

Or, make that a soccer ball on a soccer field.

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or did you miss the entire thrust of my argument? I contend that too much is unclear for me to take a definitive position, and I question how others can. I don't know whether the Conciliar popes are anti-popes or just extremely bad popes. ABL didn't know for certain either, and BpW doesn't sound absolutely positive either, although both have come down on the side of the latter being more likely.