|
ggreg
|
|
« Reply #45 on: October 26, 2009, 04:45:PM » |
|
But is the implication therefore that the New Mass is not a licit rite?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Stubborn
Gender: 
Posts: 573
|
|
« Reply #46 on: October 26, 2009, 05:39:PM » |
|
But is the implication therefore that the New Mass is not a licit rite?
I don't believe that it can be called a Mass in the sense spoken of at Trent. I mean, if any Catholic living back then were to rise from the dead and walk into a NO, they certainly wouldn't call it a Mass. Best they could hope for is to call it something with some similarities to the Mass. Either that or they'd probably call it blasphemous. Is it a licit rite? Depends who you ask. Those who pledge obedience to todays Magisterium say yes. Those who pledge obedience to the Paternal Magisterium say no - or "questionable at best". |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It is the Mass that matters.
By their fruits you shall know them.
Better to smoke here than in the hereafter.
|
|
|
GodFirst
Gender:
Personality type: don't know
Posts: 528
|
|
« Reply #47 on: November 06, 2009, 04:12:AM » |
|
I don't believe that it can be called a Mass in the sense spoken of at Trent. How so? It has a valid consecration and the consumption of the Divine Victim. Is it a licit rite? Depends who you ask.
Those who pledge obedience to todays Magisterium say yes.
Those who pledge obedience to the Paternal Magisterium say no - or "questionable at best". And then there are those who pledge obedience to "today's" Magisterium and say "no, and as well there are those who pledge obedience to the Magisterium 'of the past" and say "yes". These are confusing such confusing times, ay. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
O Divine Passion of Christ our God.
|
|
|
GodFirst
Gender:
Personality type: don't know
Posts: 528
|
|
« Reply #48 on: November 06, 2009, 04:37:AM » |
|
My take on the Tridentine Canon.
First, the Canon clearly specifies things IN the Mass and not the Mass as a whole itself. So I don't think that the Mass according to 1970 Missal as a whole can even be under condemnation by the canon. Second, many of the same specific actions (the ceremonies and signs) and some vestments used are used in Masses according to both Missals.
I would be willing to bet that no one here would say that many of the individual ceremonies, signs and vestments used in Pauline Masses (most of which are used in Tridentine Masses) are incentives to impiety, but rather that it is the gerenal ethos of modernity in such Masses.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
O Divine Passion of Christ our God.
|
|
|
Stubborn
Gender:
Posts: 573
|
|
« Reply #49 on: November 06, 2009, 04:55:AM » |
|
I don't believe that it can be called a Mass in the sense spoken of at Trent. How so? It has a valid consecration and the consumption of the Divine Victim. Does it have a valid consecration? Our Lord said "Many" - but it was replaced with "All", the validity is questionable. . . . . of course if the priest is not validly ordained then for sure the consecration is invalid, so goes the NO and on and on and on. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It is the Mass that matters.
By their fruits you shall know them.
Better to smoke here than in the hereafter.
|
|
|
LRThunder
Gender:
Posts: 1,819
|
|
« Reply #50 on: November 06, 2009, 05:21:AM » |
|
I don't believe that it can be called a Mass in the sense spoken of at Trent. How so? It has a valid consecration and the consumption of the Divine Victim. Does it have a valid consecration? Our Lord said "Many" - but it was replaced with "All", the validity is questionable. . . . . of course if the priest is not validly ordained then for sure the consecration is invalid, so goes the NO and on and on and on. Does it really say "For All?" or is it the English translation? I think the other translations translate it better "for many." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
glgas
Posts: 2,415
|
|
« Reply #51 on: November 06, 2009, 05:23:AM » |
|
Does it have a valid consecration? Our Lord said "Many" - but it was replaced with "All", the validity is questionable. . . . . of course if the priest is not validly ordained then for sure the consecration is invalid, so goes the NO and on and on and on.
'Pro multis' as in the official version of the New mass means 'for many'. The ICEL is not the Church, and even the ICEL acknowledged their mitranslation, and from the spring of next year thae new one will be used in the US too. As for the validity of the ordination of the priest please meditate of the fact that the concept of the hierarchy and the dependence on the Pope, thus the meaning of the priesthood was redefined not then mainstream church, but the small minority. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
GodFirst
Gender:
Personality type: don't know
Posts: 528
|
|
« Reply #52 on: November 07, 2009, 07:06:AM » |
|
I don't believe that it can be called a Mass in the sense spoken of at Trent. How so? It has a valid consecration and the consumption of the Divine Victim. Does it have a valid consecration? Our Lord said "Many" - but it was replaced with "All", the validity is questionable. . . . . of course if the priest is not validly ordained then for sure the consecration is invalid, so goes the NO and on and on and on. Well, I was speaking strictly of Rome's Latin Missal, not the unguaranteed venacular tranlations. Still St. Pius X taught that "This is My Body...This is...My Blood" were all that were necessary. Most theologians for a time have held that opinion, which makes it very safe. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
O Divine Passion of Christ our God.
|
|
|
|
petrelton
Posts: 378
|
|
« Reply #53 on: November 07, 2009, 07:21:AM » |
|
No contradiction...because as DK likes to point out...it's not Catholic...and it is not the thing the writers at Trent had on their mind
Who gives a continental what DK thinks. He is a vulgar buffoon not a church authority. You guys pick and choose what you like out of tradition and modernism. Poor show. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Here are the words of Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) regarding the New Mass:
The liturgical reform, in its concrete realization, has distanced itself even more from its origin. The result has not been a reanimation, but devastation. In place of the liturgy, fruit of a continual development, they have placed a fabricated liturgy. They have deserted a vital process of growth and becoming in order to substitute a fabrication.They did not want to continue the development, the organic maturing of something living through the centuries, and they replaced it, in the manner of technical production, by a fabrication, a banal product of the moment.
(Revue Theologisches, Vol. 20, Feb. 1990, pgs. 103-104)
|
|
|
devotedknuckles
Of course this land is dangerous! All of the animals Are capably murderous
Personality type: MisfitTrad
Posts: 9,402
|
|
« Reply #54 on: November 07, 2009, 07:25:AM » |
|
U care eniugh pissiltrpon to post about what I think
LOL
U r on your way to joining my cult of personality
Sip
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I do not like this word "bomb." It is not a bomb. It is a device that is exploding." - French ambassador to New Zealand Jacques le Blanc, regarding press coverage of France's nuclear weapons tests in the Pacific http://www.martinjetpack.com/http://www.mugshotmuseum.com/SIP I never trust a fighting man who doesn't smoke or drink. - Admiral William Halsey |
|
|
Stubborn
Gender:
Posts: 573
|
|
« Reply #55 on: November 07, 2009, 04:28:PM » |
|
Does it have a valid consecration? Our Lord said "Many" - but it was replaced with "All", the validity is questionable. . . . . of course if the priest is not validly ordained then for sure the consecration is invalid, so goes the NO and on and on and on.
'Pro multis' as in the official version of the New mass means 'for many'. The ICEL is not the Church, and even the ICEL acknowledged their mitranslation, and from the spring of next year thae new one will be used in the US too. As for the validity of the ordination of the priest please meditate of the fact that the concept of the hierarchy and the dependence on the Pope, thus the meaning of the priesthood was redefined not then mainstream church, but the small minority. The meaning of the priesthood was redefined like everything else in the new rite. After what, 500 years they come up with a completely different rite of ordination? - that fact alone makes the validity of ordinations questionable. Same goes for the words of consecration. The validity of the new rite of consecrating the bread and wine is not the same words that were used for centuries, again, questionable ipso facto. No stone was left unturned, even if it was just for the sake of rearranging stones. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It is the Mass that matters.
By their fruits you shall know them.
Better to smoke here than in the hereafter.
|
|
|
Scipio_a
Don't forget your Rosaries for crusade 3
Gender:
Personality type: balanced
Posts: 3,683
ISLAM DELENDA EST
|
|
« Reply #56 on: November 07, 2009, 06:09:PM » |
|
No contradiction...because as DK likes to point out...it's not Catholic...and it is not the thing the writers at Trent had on their mind
Who gives a continental what DK thinks. He is a vulgar buffoon not a church authority. You guys pick and choose what you like out of tradition and modernism. Poor show. Yeah...we pick tradition...because we want to align with the Truth no matter what...and we reject modernism...which really puts your panties in a wad |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I ain't no freakin' monument to justice!" -Moonstruck Send your Rosary totals and sacrifice totals to: Rosary Crusade Regina Coeli House 11485 N. Farley Road Platte City, MO 64079 Spread sheet for the 3rd Rosary Crusade: http://sspx.org/fatima_rosary_crusade_tally_form.pdf |
|
|
devotedknuckles
Of course this land is dangerous! All of the animals Are capably murderous
Personality type: MisfitTrad
Posts: 9,402
|
|
« Reply #57 on: November 07, 2009, 06:50:PM » |
|
A wad?
Now that's bein polite
Sip
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I do not like this word "bomb." It is not a bomb. It is a device that is exploding." - French ambassador to New Zealand Jacques le Blanc, regarding press coverage of France's nuclear weapons tests in the Pacific http://www.martinjetpack.com/http://www.mugshotmuseum.com/SIP I never trust a fighting man who doesn't smoke or drink. - Admiral William Halsey |
|
|
anthony
Gender:
Personality type: Sarcasctic?
Posts: 339
|
|
« Reply #58 on: November 19, 2009, 04:35:PM » |
|
I can't believe this thread is four pages in.
Please tell me none of you studied philosophy under traddy Jesuits..
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"It is the primary duty of a Christian, to convince those who consider themselves modern,
that human nature should not be interpreted with systematic pessimism nor with shallow
optimism."
— Pius XII (Humani Generis)
"Just be cool buddy, your not fugly."
— CanadianCatholic
|
|
|
|
SearchingCatholic
|
|
« Reply #59 on: November 20, 2009, 05:07:PM » |
|
Does it have a valid consecration? Our Lord said "Many" - but it was replaced with "All", the validity is questionable. . . . . of course if the priest is not validly ordained then for sure the consecration is invalid, so goes the NO and on and on and on.
'Pro multis' as in the official version of the New mass means 'for many'. The ICEL is not the Church, and even the ICEL acknowledged their mistranslation, and from the spring of next year the new one will be used in the US too. As for the validity of the ordination of the priest please meditate of the fact that the concept of the hierarchy and the dependence on the Pope, thus the meaning of the priesthood was redefined not then mainstream church, but the small minority. The meaning of the priesthood was redefined like everything else in the new rite. After what, 500 years they come up with a completely different rite of ordination? - that fact alone makes the validity of ordinations questionable. Same goes for the words of consecration. The validity of the new rite of consecrating the bread and wine is not the same words that were used for centuries, again, questionable ipso facto. No stone was left unturned, even if it was just for the sake of rearranging stones. How did they change the rite of ordination and how does that make the ordinations questionable? Can you direct me to previous threads or books ZI can read since I am new here? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
