Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: A Criticism of RECUSANT 10  (Read 6463 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Johnnier

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 99
  • Reputation: +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
A Criticism of RECUSANT 10
« Reply #45 on: October 04, 2013, 01:54:14 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Emerentiana,

    Nice theory, but it has nothing to do with reality or Catholic sacramental theology.

    The Novus Ordo according to the book has always been held as valid by the Archbishop, I think he knew something about Church sacramental theology.


    Offline Emerentiana

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1420
    • Reputation: +1194/-17
    • Gender: Female
    A Criticism of RECUSANT 10
    « Reply #46 on: October 04, 2013, 12:10:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Johnnier
    Emerentiana,

    Nice theory, but it has nothing to do with reality or Catholic sacramental theology.

    The Novus Ordo according to the book has always been held as valid by the Archbishop, I think he knew something about Church sacramental theology.


    Well, if thats the case, John, Bishop  L  was pressured into taking that stand, as I have heard that he did not believe that way.
    If the words of consecration were changed, as they were in1969, the New Mass became invalid.  You dont have to be a Theologian to understand that.


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    A Criticism of RECUSANT 10
    « Reply #47 on: October 06, 2013, 05:53:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .





    :sleep:                              




    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.