Author Topic: Is this Fellayism? (Read 614 times)

reconquest · « **on:** July 30, 2013, 06:24:38 PM »

I was told by the priest at my SSPX church that the New Mass was conditionally valid (i.e. depending on the individual priest's intentions and theology). Is this the Fellayite line or has the society traditionally held this view?

Sigismund · « **Reply #1 on:** July 30, 2013, 06:26:21 PM »

As I understand it, The SSPX has always held that the NO is valid if said correctly. Defective, certainly, but valid.

reconquest · « **Reply #2 on:** July 30, 2013, 06:27:06 PM »

Thanks for clearing that up so quickly.

eddiearent · « **Reply #3 on:** July 30, 2013, 08:44:34 PM »

You never know, the positions change half the time. I was speaking with a Fellayite one day and she said the Novus Ordo was valid but illicit --- a statement against the Canons of the Council of Trent if you believe Paul VI and subsequent claiments to be Pope but I digress.

Frances · « **Reply #4 on:** July 30, 2013, 10:04:41 PM »

:devil2:
Look up the Catholic meaning of "valid." A Satanic, 'black mass' can be "valid." It is certainly not pleasing to God.
:sad:

Incredulous · « **Reply #5 on:** July 30, 2013, 11:05:10 PM »

The previous official SSPX line... according to Msgr. Fellay, is that the Novus ordo missae is intrinsically evil.

Bishop Fellay publicly stated that Paul VI’s Mass is “intrinsically evil” because it lacks a good – the purity of doctrine

Explained as when a "good", functional component of something good is removed from the whole, for no reason, it is the definition of evil.

For example, when the Tridentine Offertory prayers were removed from the Novus ordo Mass and replaced with an ejaculation prayer from the Kabalah, it is evil. Source: "Blood on the Altar" by Craig Heimbichner

Blood on the Altar PDF

When Bp. Fellay explained this to Cardinal Hoyas, the Cardinal was embarrassed because he nor his aides knew this definition of evil.