Can Anyone Show Me One Or More Parts of The Ordinary Of The Novus Ordo Missal That Is Contrary To Catholicism ?

[DrBombay]

Bombay is correct. If the Novus Ordo is an act of the ordinary Magisterium, by that very fact it must be free from error.

Nope.

If what you say is correct then there is no crisis.

Ah, so you do deny the infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium.

Heretic. 

You've gotten yourself even more screwed up - went and became an armchair theologian I see. 

Learn your faith before you try to understand that which, without faith there can be no understanding of.

Silence, heretic.  I know my faith.  You, however, have demonstrated that your hatred for Christ's Church has led you where it always leads.  Into the denial of Truth.

I'd repent if I were you.  You really don't want to die a heretic.  Especially one who's been receiving invalid "absolution" from priests without faculties for decades.  Just sayin. 

Hypocrite. You publicly declare the new rite to be free of error, and have the nerve to accuse others of heresy!?
You didn't respond the first time, but I'll ask again:  When has the Church ever held that there are presently two covenants?

Yes, the normative form of the Roman Rite is free of error.  And if you deny that you are a heretic.  Q.E.D.   

 Here we have it. You have just publicly professed a believe in two covenants. This is indeed heresy, and you are on the verge of committing consensual spiritual adultery if you haven't already. I'll provide proof that you do not hold what the Church does, hopefully this will help you humble yourself to authority as your soul is in peril.

Pope Pius XII - Mystici Corporis Christi

28. That He completed His work on the gibbet of the Cross is the unanimous teaching of the holy Fathers who assert that the Church was born from the side of our Savior on the Cross like a new Eve, mother of all the living. [28] "And it is now," says the great St. Ambrose, speaking of the pierced side of Christ, "that it is built, it is now that it is formed, it is now that it is...molded, it is now that it is created... Now it is that arises a spiritual house, a holy priesthood." [29] One who reverently examines this venerable teaching will easily discover the reasons on which it is based.

29. And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was preaching in a restricted area - He was not sent but to the sheep that were lost of the House of Israel [30] - the Law and the Gospel were together in force; [31] but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees [32] fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, [33] establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race.[34] "To such an extent, then," says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, "was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom." [35]

30. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head of His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles";[38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members; it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been untied to this Mystical Body through the waters of Baptism except by the salutary virtue of the Cross, by which they had been already brought under the complete sway of Christ.

   You actually think I'm going to read that novel?  Heh.  As if.   

 Suit yourself, in rejecting the words of Pope Pius XII you've now shown yourself to be what many might have suspected, a formal heretic. There is no reason to argue with you any more, if the Popes can't get through to you nothing short of a miracle will.
Like the above poster typed, at CAF there is a thriving community of other cowardly heretics and apostates who hate the Church and the Popes just as much as you do, I suggest making yourself at home there.

Oh!  Name calling.  You wound me.   :(  Really, I have no idea why you posted that quote from Pius XII.  Nobody was even talking about covenants.  Focus, Chester.  Focus!   

[Dellery]

Bombay is correct. If the Novus Ordo is an act of the ordinary Magisterium, by that very fact it must be free from error.

Nope.

If what you say is correct then there is no crisis.

Ah, so you do deny the infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium.

Heretic. 

You've gotten yourself even more screwed up - went and became an armchair theologian I see. 

Learn your faith before you try to understand that which, without faith there can be no understanding of.

Silence, heretic.  I know my faith.  You, however, have demonstrated that your hatred for Christ's Church has led you where it always leads.  Into the denial of Truth.

I'd repent if I were you.  You really don't want to die a heretic.  Especially one who's been receiving invalid "absolution" from priests without faculties for decades.  Just sayin. 

Hypocrite. You publicly declare the new rite to be free of error, and have the nerve to accuse others of heresy!?
You didn't respond the first time, but I'll ask again:  When has the Church ever held that there are presently two covenants?

Yes, the normative form of the Roman Rite is free of error.  And if you deny that you are a heretic.  Q.E.D.   

 Here we have it. You have just publicly professed a believe in two covenants. This is indeed heresy, and you are on the verge of committing consensual spiritual adultery if you haven't already. I'll provide proof that you do not hold what the Church does, hopefully this will help you humble yourself to authority as your soul is in peril.

Pope Pius XII - Mystici Corporis Christi

28. That He completed His work on the gibbet of the Cross is the unanimous teaching of the holy Fathers who assert that the Church was born from the side of our Savior on the Cross like a new Eve, mother of all the living. [28] "And it is now," says the great St. Ambrose, speaking of the pierced side of Christ, "that it is built, it is now that it is formed, it is now that it is...molded, it is now that it is created... Now it is that arises a spiritual house, a holy priesthood." [29] One who reverently examines this venerable teaching will easily discover the reasons on which it is based.

29. And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was preaching in a restricted area - He was not sent but to the sheep that were lost of the House of Israel [30] - the Law and the Gospel were together in force; [31] but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees [32] fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, [33] establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race.[34] "To such an extent, then," says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, "was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom." [35]

30. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head of His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles";[38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members; it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been untied to this Mystical Body through the waters of Baptism except by the salutary virtue of the Cross, by which they had been already brought under the complete sway of Christ.

   You actually think I'm going to read that novel?  Heh.  As if.   

 Suit yourself, in rejecting the words of Pope Pius XII you've now shown yourself to be what many might have suspected, a formal heretic. There is no reason to argue with you any more, if the Popes can't get through to you nothing short of a miracle will.
Like the above poster typed, at CAF there is a thriving community of other cowardly heretics and apostates who hate the Church and the Popes just as much as you do, I suggest making yourself at home there.

Oh!  Name calling.  You wound me.   :(  Really, I have no idea why you posted that quote from Pius XII.  Nobody was even talking about covenants.  Focus, Chester.  Focus!   

I keep bringing up covenants because you have yet to reconcile your believe that the new rite contains no error, with the blatant heresy solemnly prayed for each year on Good Friday in the new rite. You claim the new rite is free from defect, but the Church tells us otherwise.

I didn't call you any names, I like most of your posts, and I apologize if I've offended you, however, I get the impression you have contempt for the Church and Her teachings, such contempt is usually fueled by cowardice, a desire to serve mammon and God because defying one's superiors is too much of a sacrifice. Do you seriously believe only offering up a small pinch of incense to the pagan gods of Rome and Judaism will buy you peace? Evil begets evil, Judas' 30 pieces of silver didn't get him very far did it?

[Stubborn]

The pope, when teaching as part of the ordinary Magisterium, is incapable of error.

I see you did not even attempt to address the request of providing a reference.

At any rate, what you wrote above is not true, if anything it is a half truth, which makes it worse than an outright lie. And no, I am not accusing you of lying or spreading lies - I am accusing you of a grave misunderstanding, hence the misapplication of papal infallibility, it is the same misunderstanding of papal infallibility that NOers and protestants hold.

In a nutshell, as per V1: For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, And certainly not when this new doctrine is, as St. Pius X defines it, the doctrine of Modernists.

The enemy cannot be "within." Something's gotta give.

 
The damage that has been accomplished thus far could only have been accomplished from within.

[Dellery]

Can I just say that people could stand to calm down and take a few deep breaths before posting on this thread?

SSPX defenders...is the only thing propping up Society marriages and confessions the assertion of the Society's priests claiming a state of necessity? 

That seems...problematic to me.

So be it, a lot of us think the acts of apostasy and heretical theology rife within Church hierarchy as being problematic, but hey, who's to say saving souls isn't evil too? (sarcasm)

[DrBombay]

Bombay is correct. If the Novus Ordo is an act of the ordinary Magisterium, by that very fact it must be free from error.

Nope.

If what you say is correct then there is no crisis.

Ah, so you do deny the infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium.

Heretic. 

You've gotten yourself even more screwed up - went and became an armchair theologian I see. 

Learn your faith before you try to understand that which, without faith there can be no understanding of.

Silence, heretic.  I know my faith.  You, however, have demonstrated that your hatred for Christ's Church has led you where it always leads.  Into the denial of Truth.

I'd repent if I were you.  You really don't want to die a heretic.  Especially one who's been receiving invalid "absolution" from priests without faculties for decades.  Just sayin. 

Hypocrite. You publicly declare the new rite to be free of error, and have the nerve to accuse others of heresy!?
You didn't respond the first time, but I'll ask again:  When has the Church ever held that there are presently two covenants?

Yes, the normative form of the Roman Rite is free of error.  And if you deny that you are a heretic.  Q.E.D.   

 Here we have it. You have just publicly professed a believe in two covenants. This is indeed heresy, and you are on the verge of committing consensual spiritual adultery if you haven't already. I'll provide proof that you do not hold what the Church does, hopefully this will help you humble yourself to authority as your soul is in peril.

Pope Pius XII - Mystici Corporis Christi

28. That He completed His work on the gibbet of the Cross is the unanimous teaching of the holy Fathers who assert that the Church was born from the side of our Savior on the Cross like a new Eve, mother of all the living. [28] "And it is now," says the great St. Ambrose, speaking of the pierced side of Christ, "that it is built, it is now that it is formed, it is now that it is...molded, it is now that it is created... Now it is that arises a spiritual house, a holy priesthood." [29] One who reverently examines this venerable teaching will easily discover the reasons on which it is based.

29. And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was preaching in a restricted area - He was not sent but to the sheep that were lost of the House of Israel [30] - the Law and the Gospel were together in force; [31] but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees [32] fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, [33] establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race.[34] "To such an extent, then," says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, "was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom." [35]

30. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head of His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles";[38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members; it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been untied to this Mystical Body through the waters of Baptism except by the salutary virtue of the Cross, by which they had been already brought under the complete sway of Christ.

   You actually think I'm going to read that novel?  Heh.  As if.   

 Suit yourself, in rejecting the words of Pope Pius XII you've now shown yourself to be what many might have suspected, a formal heretic. There is no reason to argue with you any more, if the Popes can't get through to you nothing short of a miracle will.
Like the above poster typed, at CAF there is a thriving community of other cowardly heretics and apostates who hate the Church and the Popes just as much as you do, I suggest making yourself at home there.

Oh!  Name calling.  You wound me.   :(  Really, I have no idea why you posted that quote from Pius XII.  Nobody was even talking about covenants.  Focus, Chester.  Focus!   

I keep bringing up covenants because you have yet to reconcile your believe that the new rite contains no error, with the blatant heresy solemnly prayed for each year on Good Friday in the new rite. You claim the new rite is free from defect, but the Church tells us otherwise.

I didn't call you any names, I like most of your posts, and I apologize if I've offended you, however, I get the impression you have contempt for the Church and Her teachings, such contempt is usually fueled by cowardice, a desire to serve mammon and God because defying one's superiors is too much of a sacrifice. Do you seriously believe only offering up a small pinch of incense to the pagan gods of Rome and Judaism will buy you peace? Evil begets evil, Judas' 30 pieces of silver didn't get him very far did it?

Oh, I see. Sorry, I missed that.

No, I don't believe there are two covenants.  The promises God made to Israel in the OT were inherited by the Church due to that nation's rejection of the Messiah.  The Church is the new Israel.

I just don't see that the prayer is heretical.  If the Jews "grow in faithfulness to his covenant", since there is only one covenant in effect, namely the new and eternal covenant poured out for you and for many, then they can only grow in faithfulness to this new covenant. I suppose you can interpret it as heresy, but I disagree with that interpretation.  

But I'm kind of a dope, so I'm likely in error.  Meh.  

[Stubborn]

Can I just say that people could stand to calm down and take a few deep breaths before posting on this thread?

SSPX defenders...is the only thing propping up Society marriages and confessions the assertion of the Society's priests claiming a state of necessity? 

That seems...problematic to me.

"Propping up"? SSPX sacraments are the same as they've always been for a 500 years, that's how you can be confident they are the real deal.

Briefly, to reply to your question: The NO sacraments have all been changed.

When the changes to the sacraments were occurring in the NO some 40 years ago, there was good reason to doubt that they actually were still valid sacraments. Nothing has changed since then *EXCEPT* most Catholic's acceptance of those changes which rendered the sacraments doubtful. Most have no idea that the NO sacraments are new.

As such, the NO sacraments are doubtful -  to all who understand the massive adulterations involved to change all the sacraments which rendered them doubtful = where there is doubt regarding the sacraments, we cannot participate. THAT, in a nutshell, is why we remain in the state of necessity.
 

[TrentCath]

Silence, heretic.  I know my faith.  You, however, have demonstrated that your hatred for Christ's Church has led you where it always leads.  Into the denial of Truth.

I'd repent if I were you.  You really don't want to die a heretic.  Especially one who's been receiving invalid "absolution" from priests without faculties for decades.  Just sayin. 

Enough already. Whilst his position of recognizing and resisting a pope is erroneous, it's troubling to see people doubt that an emergency situation exists which necessitates, on a purely pastoral level, the work the SSPX does.

And what emergency is that son?  Because you might say I'm intimately familiar with a certain diocese in which the SSPX operates and I assure you at no time has there been a necessity for suspended priests to exercise their ministry and simulate sacraments in said diocese since there are sufficient Catholic priests and parishes to serve the needs of all the faithful, and have been for decades.

'simulate sacraments' do you even know what that means?  A priest who hears confessions without jurisdiction is not simulating a sacrament, I trust that you are referring to confessions and marriage? I would guess that even you are not crazy enough to deny the validity of SSPX masses?

Regardless there is the little matter of:
i) a state of necessity
ii)failing that, supplied jurisidction

With these two things you can't really accuse an SSPX priest of not having jurisdiction, though giving your penchant for ignoring reason and church teaching in favour of your own absurd opinions I don't doubt you will continue to do so.

Neither a state of necessity nor supplied jurisdiction apply.  Otherwise, there would be no need for the SSPX to negotiate sanation of all marriages performed in SSPX chapels as part of their rapprochement with the Holy See.  Q.E.D.   

Oh yeah, you've been considerably lacking in reason and Church teaching both I must say.  Don't have an aneurism.  That would not be in your "favour." 

"Favour."   

 

You really are clueless aren't you? You can't make a sound argument that there is neither a state of necessity nor supplied jurisdiction because you haven't the least clue about either of those two things, if you did you'd know its impossible to say that supplied jurisidiction doesn't apply as you'd be required to see the state of mind and knowledge of all those who approached the SSPX for confessions, something neither you nor I can do

In other words because of your total ignorance you've just shot yourself in the foot

As for anyone who denies that there's a state of necessity, they are ipso facto delusional and suffering from severe cognitive dissonance, no one who looks at the church today and makes an honest appraisal can deny that there is a state of necessity.

[TrentCath]

The pope, when teaching as part of the ordinary Magisterium, is incapable of error.

The enemy cannot be "within." Something's gotta give.

I see you're still spreading falsehoods that you've failed to prove are church teaching as church teaching, will you never learn?

[Stubborn]

As for anyone who denies that there's a state of necessity, they are ipso facto delusional and suffering from severe cognitive dissonance, no one who looks at the church today and makes an honest appraisal can deny that there is a state of necessity.

Well now TrentCath, don't be sugar coating everything! Come right out and say what you *really* mean ha ha ha

Great post yet again!

[Phillipus Iacobus]

The pope, when teaching as part of the ordinary Magisterium, is incapable of error.

The enemy cannot be "within." Something's gotta give.

I see you're still spreading falsehoods that you've failed to prove are church teaching as church teaching, will you never learn?

I will provide sources again later today. If you reject them, it's on you.