Licit to attend weekly NO Masses with abuses?
#46
(04-23-2009, 12:52 AM)Rosarium Wrote:
(04-22-2009, 10:35 PM)INPEFESS Wrote: Would it concern you if you weren't even sure whether or not the priest even believed in the Real Presence? My doubts about the priest's intention to effect the Sacrifice of the Mass would be layed to rest the moment he began to treat the Body of Blood of Christ like he actually believed it was the Body and Blood of Christ.

It would be his sin and his alone if he didn't. Whether he believes or not doesn't matter as long as he is ordained and uses the proper form I think.

If we know that it is unlikely and doubtful (due to the actions of the priest) that he truly believes the Eucharist is actually the Body and Blood of Our Lord, then his intention to actually consecrate the Host as the Body and Blood of Our Lord is likewise doubtful. Considering the priests’ actions often provide a probable doubt of this belief, their intentions are often equally dubious (to a participator who seeks to enjoin himself with the Body of Christ).

Yes, it would be very sinful for him; it could likewise be dangerous for us. A doubtful sacrament is no sacrament at all. If one is aware that an objective doubt exists, but fails to acknowledge that doubt, then that sacrament does not bind. If there is an objective doubt manifested in the priests' actions (or lack thereof) as to the intention (and very often matter and form) of the sacrament, one must bear in mind the axiom: "Lex dubia non obligat." (I know you're not stupid, so I don't want to treat you as if you are. But just for clarification, the English translation of the Latin word 'Obligat' is 'Bind').

I mention matter and form because these abuses occur more often than intention. One who knows that there is a likelihood of abuse, whether by commission or omission (given their frequency during the application of the Novus Ordo Missae), would then have to know, with absolute certainty parallel to that of a priest, exactly what constitutes the matter and form of the sacrament in order to eliminate any danger of worshipping bread. Because we know the likelihood of danger, we have a responsibility to avoid the danger. 

This doubt very rarely exists in the Traditional Latin Mass; likewise, the participator does not assume this responsibility. If, however, we knew that a certain priest was treating the Body and Blood of Christ with grave disrespect at a Traditional Latin Mass, which of us would not avoid this priest at all costs for fear of the dangers mentioned above? Further, would our desire to receive grace eliminate the objective doubt of which we were aware?


Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Licit to attend weekly NO Masses with abuses? - by INPEFESS - 04-23-2009, 10:06 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)