How bad would a Novus Ordo Mass have to be to justify not attending?
#41
(05-02-2009, 04:07 PM)tradmaverick Wrote:
(05-02-2009, 03:40 PM)kjvail Wrote:
(05-02-2009, 03:37 PM)tradmaverick Wrote:
(05-02-2009, 01:31 PM)Rosarium Wrote:
(05-02-2009, 01:29 PM)kjvail Wrote: I guess I'm a radical.
Are you free as well? Take some anti-oxidants.

Quote:I won't go to the NO, not even the one at Holy Rosary which is arguably "reverent".
What if it were your only choice and you had an obligation to attend? A few years ago, I'd say I'd never go the NO, but alas, it is all I can reach now.


Thats a tough one alright, I know how it is, it can be almost impossible to get to the old Mass sometimes, - and sometimes for a long long period of time.
I myself only get to go to Mass twice a month - I know that probably brilliant in your position cause you cant reach it anymore. Ill say a few prayers for you if like!

But what myself and my wife do on the remaining sundays is read through our Missal, pray our Rosary and sanctify out Sunday as best we can, theres nothing Id love better than to go to our local parish and go to Mass, but sadly it remains that it is a sin to do so for us (based on the theological reasons the SSPX and others provide,), I know different traditional Catholics have different opinions on this so Im not accusing anybody of anything, were all doing our best at the end of the day and none of us want to go to the New Mass.

Although I have heard some weird things in my time as a traddy - I heard about some group up on the east coast -somewhere near New York I think that went to some independent chapel - the Priest died, they would go the Novus Ordo and they would go to the SSPX, so they put up a big monitor and watched the Priests Masses every Sunday (the Priest who died that is).

I have to say, on this, I think the society is largely correct.
The NO mass is valid AS IT IS WRITTEN. But, I've never seen it celebrated according to the rubics - ad populum, no Latin, communion in the hand... these are components of the most reverent of NOs. I can't do it and there are much deeper theological reasons too.
A good read, if you have the head for advanced theology, is Catherine Pickstock, After Writing: The Liturgical Consummation of Philosophy. It'll change the way you look at things.


Really? Sounds interesting can you tell me anymore about it?

I agree with you on your point it really isnt about just the pure rubrics of the new Mass, it can be deceptively traditional looking, if done strictly according to the book and in Latin etc (I was in an order that done this)
The reality is its about more than the language of Latin, or incense or anything like that, more than the  'smells and bells' as they say. Its about doctrine - is the New Mass truly Catholic? Even in its Latin form. If it is then we cant really argue, if its not, then it doesn't fulfill our obligation anyway, so we dont have to go. Of course like you said there are much deeper theological reasons, thats just kind of a common sense reason, you could go on for pages and pages why a Catholic doesnt have to attend the New Mass.

But even as its written there is considerable debate about whether its valid -me personally although I would argue that it is doubtful (because there is probable doubt) (the fact that our Lord did say mysterium fidei (it isnt just a custom, he said it) and for many etc), I would tend to think that it is valid (based on St.Thomas Aquinas' opinon and the opinion of Cardinal Ottaviani and Bacci), but certainly no can say it isnt being debated, that there isnt any arguments that say it isnt invalid.

But I would tend to agree with the good Cardinal as they said in their critique:

" As they appear in the context of the Novus Ordo, the words of Consecration could be valid in virtue of the priest's intention. But since their validity no longer comes from the force of the sacramental words themselves (ex vi verborum)--or more precisely, from the meaning (modus significandi) the old rite of the Mass gave to the formula--the words of Consecration in the New Order of Mass could also not be valid. Will priests in the near future, who receive no traditional formation and who rely on the Novus Ordo for the intention of "doing what the Church does," validly consecrate at Mass? One may be allowed to doubt it."

I think the issue of validity in the N.O will get worse as time goes on, unless younger Priests who are coming up have better ideas on things. my own parish Priest in my hometown would constantly harp on about the Mass not being obligatory and that 'were all here because we want to be not because we have to be'.

Hmmm... I'm not sure if I can communicate her thesis clearly. Lemme try using a review from Amazon that I think is accurate.
""Her thesis: outside liturgy, as embodied in the traditional Mass, there can be no meaning. The first half of her book examines the crucial role of praise of the divine, or 'doxology,' in the philosophy and culture of the ancient world. She explains how, with the coming of Christendom, the doxological dimension of antique thought was brought to a fuller realization in early liturgical texts, and thereby shaped the culture and politics of civilization of the pre-modern era."

I think that's pretty accurate and better than I could do in as few words. She is talking about things that don't fit into words real well. The "liturgical and doxological" nature of language and a view of reality that is completely alien to the modern, which she draws from Plato Phaedrus and the Tridentine rite.

It's a book in the school of "Radical Orthodoxy" and is extremely difficult to parse if you don't have an advanced knowledge of post-modern theology, Thomism and modern philosophy. It's an academic work for academics but its worth the effort.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: How bad would a Novus Ordo Mass have to be to justify not attending? - by kjvail - 05-02-2009, 04:15 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)