FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae (/showthread.php?tid=64572)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - Melchior - 08-18-2013

(08-18-2013, 08:49 AM)2Vermont Wrote: I used to feel that way too.  Like I said, I don't feel good about this but it seems to me that even Cardinal Ottavani questioned it.  Logically (not feelings) I just don't see how something that is a "striking departure" from the Catholic Faith can still be "of" the Catholic Faith.  Someone explain to me the logic there because I just don't see it.  Perhaps it is valid, but I believe it is schismatic.  And I can't go to an Orthodox Church to fulfill my Sunday obligation, so I see no difference here. 

Many of you have the TLM every week.  I do not. It's easy to tell someone who doesn't have access to the TLM that I should go to the NO no matter. 

I know that I can be wrong and I wrestle with it.  Just pray for me and my husband.

It's the lawful authority that determines what is and is not schismatic (and who is and isn't in schism - that's why people shouldn't declare the SSPX to be in "full-blown schism"; only the Pope has this power, he has the Keys).  Although Cardinal Ottavani (much like anyone) is entitled to his opinion(s), he isn't the lawful authority to make the declaration that something is now schismatic.  And ultimately, and I think you know this, neither are you.  That's possibly a cause of your inner conflict, where "logically" you seem this as a schismatic Mass - but in your heart you know that the one whom holds the Keys is the only one who can make such a statement.

Disobedience to the Holy See, not attending Mass on Sunday.  Questioning validity.  Denying lawful authority their jurisdiction.  There's two groups that have this in common; liberals and trads who go too far off the deep end.  In the end, they both find themselves in the same location; outside the Church.

I will pray for you and your husband, that you both find peace.


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - JoniCath - 08-18-2013




This letter is the nail in the NO coffin for me.  I will never set foot in another NO mass again (even if that means not going to Church on Sunday).  I wouldn't go to a Protestant church to fulfill my Sunday obligation, why would I go to this farce?
[/quote]

I quit attending the Novus Ordo Mass, with it's EXTRAordinary EM.'s prancing all around the Sanctuary,  it's altar GIRLS, it's lectors, it's NOISE,  about 5 yrs. ago. (Except for 1 funeral I attended & that's another horrible subject.) I'd attended the TLM from the time I was born in 1941 until I was 28. That's when they first brought the "new Mass" into my diocese. I then attended it faithfully until 1985 & I started missing Mass for reasons that I would never have accepted before. Then God blessed me. We got a TLM in my city when SP was promulgated.

I didn't miss Mass again,( though it started at 12:30PM.). I purchased a 1962 daily Missal & a veil & felt like I was home, again. A few years later that priest was transferred to a parish in KC. where he could give this Latin Mass to more people. However, that left me a round trip drive of 150 miles to attend the TLM. My husband & I are retired & we just can't afford the gas.

Pope Benedict said that where there is a need for the Mass of the Ages the priests & Bishops were to fill that need. They were to make the Latin Mass GENEROUSLY available. They aren't. Therefore, I stay home & read my Missal & pray the Rosary & I think that God will accept that. (I'd be better off had I never prayed the Latin Mass at all. Because I grew up with it, DAILY, I knew how wrong this new Mass was.



Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - Miriam_M - 08-18-2013

It is absolutely critical that Catholics who feel uneasy with their current Mass options express that uneasiness to their priests.  Not their bishops, their priests.  Pastors are responsible for The Bottom Line of parish collections, and are often transferred to other parishes for that reason and no other.  Now, in one parish I attended a couple of years ago, a priest did not listen to his parishioners when they appealed for more tradition of any kind (devotions, an accessible building in which to pray, frequent Confession, & more).  He had a blind spot, so -- not responsive to his parishioners -- he was simply moved to a parish with a more wealthy parishioner base. That parish, however, is basically the only such parish in his city, so the archdiocese was merely throwing up its hands in acknowledging that he is unable to attract more parishioners to enlarge the Sunday collections.

His former parish is now attracting more members because the TLM is being offered there once/week.  The attendance there is on the side of the TLM, not the N.O. 

Catholics need to lobby directly to their priests for the TLM, and tell their pastors that they will go elsewhere if a TLM is offered elsewhere.  And then when it is offered, vote with their feet, and contribute generously to the collection, only at those Masses. 

By the way, that is my personal form of Resistance. I am mostly obligated to attend N.O. Masses for various reasons, but those I attend are exceptions to the usual N.O.  Nevertheless, my contributions are small.  I give generously when attending the TLM.


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - SaintSebastian - 08-18-2013

The Ottaviani intervention was actually written by  group of twelve theologians and priests under the direction of Archbishop Lefebrve, and then they asked Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci to give it to the Pope.  The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith ruled the critique to be exaggerated, inaccurate, and false.  As Basilios pointed out, afterward, Cardinal Ottaviani felt the concerns were adequately addressed and he accepted and encouraged all to accept the new rite as Catholic, explicitly affirming its doctrinal integrity (and affirming it was guaranteed by the Pope and Church).  Some claim that he was fooled into saying his concerns were addressed because he was old and blind, but those same people claim he was sharp and able to make his own judgments when he endorsed the critique of the other group.  I don't see how one can have it both ways.


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - Sant Anselmo - 08-18-2013

(08-18-2013, 08:49 AM)2Vermont Wrote:
(08-18-2013, 08:33 AM)Sant Anselmo Wrote:
(08-18-2013, 07:26 AM)2Vermont Wrote: I will read this more closely, but I was going to go and modify my other post.  I have serious doubts about the validity of the NO.  And, I have learned that if one has doubts about the validity of a sacrament one must not go.  I believe this is something Innocent XI said.
Trust me, I don't like it but I am having a very hard time believing that NO is the work of God's hands lately. 

You are treading down a very dangerous path and in doing so, you are putting your soul in danger.  I am frustrated by many aspects of the NO also, but to doubt its validity is something I will not do.  Prudence?  Yep.  The manner in which it is often celebrated?  Most definitely.  Validity?  No. 

I told you before that you wouldn't have to read between the lines to tell whether or not I thought you were doing too far with something.  Well, you are. 

Many of you have the TLM every week.  I do not. It's easy to tell someone who doesn't have access to the TLM that I should go to the NO no matter. 


Actually, I would be willing to bet that most of us do not have the TLM every week.  Speaking for myself, I don't have an TLM within 2 hours of me, in any direction.

The bottom line is that you either accept that the NO Mass, while imperfect, is still valid; or, you come to the conclusion that we have been lied to by the past three popes, or that they are not popes at all. 


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - Basilios - 08-18-2013

Depending on the whims of the Priests of this Diocese, I have the TLM from anywhere between 0 to 4 times a month (and usually never on a Sunday save for 1 of the maximum of 4).


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - Justin - 08-18-2013

(08-18-2013, 12:32 PM)Sant Anselmo Wrote:
(08-18-2013, 08:49 AM)2Vermont Wrote:
(08-18-2013, 08:33 AM)Sant Anselmo Wrote:
(08-18-2013, 07:26 AM)2Vermont Wrote: I will read this more closely, but I was going to go and modify my other post.  I have serious doubts about the validity of the NO.  And, I have learned that if one has doubts about the validity of a sacrament one must not go.  I believe this is something Innocent XI said.
Trust me, I don't like it but I am having a very hard time believing that NO is the work of God's hands lately. 

You are treading down a very dangerous path and in doing so, you are putting your soul in danger.  I am frustrated by many aspects of the NO also, but to doubt its validity is something I will not do.  Prudence?  Yep.  The manner in which it is often celebrated?  Most definitely.  Validity?  No. 

I told you before that you wouldn't have to read between the lines to tell whether or not I thought you were doing too far with something.  Well, you are. 

Many of you have the TLM every week.  I do not. It's easy to tell someone who doesn't have access to the TLM that I should go to the NO no matter. 


Actually, I would be willing to bet that most of us do not have the TLM every week.  Speaking for myself, I don't have an TLM within 2 hours of me, in any direction.

The bottom line is that you either accept that the NO Mass, while imperfect, is still valid; or, you come to the conclusion that we have been lied to by the past three popes, or that they are not popes at all. 
Pope Paul VI  did not seem to invoke infallibility or custom when he issued the new missal.
"But, let everyone understand well that nothing has been changed in the essence of our traditional Mass. Some perhaps will have gotten the idea that by the introduction of such and such a ceremony, or such and such a rubric being added, that such things constitute or hid alterations or minimizations of defined truths or ideas sanctioned by the Catholic Faith...
But there is nothing to this idea, absolutely. First of all, because ritual and rubrics are not in themselves a matter of dogmatic definition.


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - JoniCath - 08-18-2013

(08-18-2013, 10:50 AM)SaintSebastian Wrote: The Ottaviani intervention was actually written by  group of twelve theologians and priests under the direction of Archbishop Lefebrve, and then they asked Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci to give it to the Pope.  The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith ruled the critique to be exaggerated, inaccurate, and false.  As Basilios pointed out, afterward, Cardinal Ottaviani felt the concerns were adequately addressed and he accepted and encouraged all to accept the new rite as Catholic, explicitly affirming its doctrinal integrity (and affirming it was guaranteed by the Pope and Church).  Some claim that he was fooled into saying his concerns were addressed because he was old and blind, but those same people claim he was sharp and able to make his own judgments when he endorsed the critique of the other group.  I don't see how one can have it both ways.

I would like some documentation of your post. Where did you hear this. Please give us a link.


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - 2Vermont - 08-18-2013

(08-18-2013, 04:31 PM)JoniCath Wrote:
(08-18-2013, 10:50 AM)SaintSebastian Wrote: The Ottaviani intervention was actually written by  group of twelve theologians and priests under the direction of Archbishop Lefebrve, and then they asked Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci to give it to the Pope.  The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith ruled the critique to be exaggerated, inaccurate, and false.  As Basilios pointed out, afterward, Cardinal Ottaviani felt the concerns were adequately addressed and he accepted and encouraged all to accept the new rite as Catholic, explicitly affirming its doctrinal integrity (and affirming it was guaranteed by the Pope and Church).  Some claim that he was fooled into saying his concerns were addressed because he was old and blind, but those same people claim he was sharp and able to make his own judgments when he endorsed the critique of the other group.  I don't see how one can have it both ways.

I would like some documentation of your post. Where did you hear this. Please give us a link.

Yes, please do because the link here at fisheaters about this letter has this following it:

Editor's note about the above document:

When studying the issues involved in the new liturgy, you may come across the assertion that Cardinal Ottaviani signed a document retracting his words above. But here is what happened, as recounted at www.traditio.com

A purported letter of February 17, 1970, supposedly with the Cardinal's signature, was adduced to prove the story. However, by that date it is known that the Cardinal, then 80, was totally blind and would not have known what he was signing when presented with the purposed letter by his secretary, Msgr. Gilberto Agustoni. [Ed. Agustoni was later made Bishop, then Cardinal, by John Paul II]

Now it has come to light that this Agustoni [Ed. along with his brother, Fr. Luigi Agustoni] was a member of the Consilium which that fabricated the "New Mass" and which the Arch-Architect of the New Order service, Hannibal Bugnini, led. At the time, Jean Madiran, the editor of the respected French journal Itineraires, publicly accused Agustoni of obtaining the Cardinal's signature by fraud. As a result, Agustoni was fired as the Cardinal's secretary.

So, it seems that Agustoni insinuated his way into becoming the Cardinal's secretary and in that position created a fraud in an attempt to undermine the Cardinal's public document, which questioned the validity of the New Order service, by a phony "retraction," which Agustoni had himself written with others. In any case, co-author Antonio Cardinal Bacci and the Roman theologians never "retracted," in any manner, shape, or form the devastating document, which they courageously published.


So, unless someone can provide proof that this Cardinal retracted his statements and decided that the New Mass was suddenly Catholic again, I tend to believe the above.


Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - 2Vermont - 08-18-2013

(08-18-2013, 10:16 AM)JoniCath Wrote: I quit attending the Novus Ordo Mass, with it's EXTRAordinary EM.'s prancing all around the Sanctuary,  it's altar GIRLS, it's lectors, it's NOISE,  about 5 yrs. ago. (Except for 1 funeral I attended & that's another horrible subject.) I'd attended the TLM from the time I was born in 1941 until I was 28. That's when they first brought the "new Mass" into my diocese. I then attended it faithfully until 1985 & I started missing Mass for reasons that I would never have accepted before. Then God blessed me. We got a TLM in my city when SP was promulgated.

I didn't miss Mass again,( though it started at 12:30PM.). I purchased a 1962 daily Missal & a veil & felt like I was home, again. A few years later that priest was transferred to a parish in KC. where he could give this Latin Mass to more people. However, that left me a round trip drive of 150 miles to attend the TLM. My husband & I are retired & we just can't afford the gas.

Pope Benedict said that where there is a need for the Mass of the Ages the priests & Bishops were to fill that need. They were to make the Latin Mass GENEROUSLY available. They aren't. Therefore, I stay home & read my Missal & pray the Rosary & I think that God will accept that. (I'd be better off had I never prayed the Latin Mass at all. Because I grew up with it, DAILY, I knew how wrong this new Mass was.

With any luck God is sending me the TLM weekly starting in late September.

I was better off when I was a NO Catholic.  Ignorance was bliss. 

And thank you. IT's nice to know someone gets what I'm going through.