Licit to attend weekly NO Masses with abuses?
(12-17-2010, 08:02 PM)Nic Wrote: I sort of read through this entire thread, and it is the same thing as always.  They try to justify their going to the N.O. Mass by stating that it is a licit, valid Mass.  They say that receiving Communion is all that matters, even if the priest preaches modernism and outright heresy, old women pass out the Host like cookies, little girls serve at the "altar" (really a table) and women read and speak openly in Mass.  These atrocities are regular at almost ANY Novus Ordo Mass, but there are much more than just those that go on quite regularly. Once they finally realize that the validity of the N.O. Mass is NOT the issue, then they may finally start to get somewhere.  Most trads who completely shun the N.O. are quite aware that it is a valid Mass - we refuse to attend because the N.O. is an usurper rite, and the SACRILEGE is the issue, not the validity.  The N.O. Mass was designed to allow these kinds of abuses, these kinds of sacrileges.  Therefore, logic simply dictates that the N.O. Mass, by its very essence, is a sacrilege in itself because it is a stripped down, defaced version of the True Mass.  If the laws and definition of sacrilege apply to the defacing of, for example, a crucifx, a holy thing - then how much more does the definition of sacrilege apply to the most holy thing we know, the Mass?  The architects of the New Mass (among them being Protestants and a very suspected Freemason bishop) began with what they knew, which was the TLM.  They intentionally defaced the TLM to produce the New Mass by way of mutilation and fabrication.  This has been admitted when they said they would strip away Catholicism from the Mass!  How is this not the quintessential definition of sacrilege?  Therefore, the N.O. Mass is by the strictest terms of the definition a sacrilege.

Also, if it isn't enough that the N.O. Mass is an obvious sacrilege by its very nature, then how about this:  Thomas Cranmer's "Lord's Supper" service was condemned by the Roman Catholic Church in the 16th century, and Cranmer himself was burnt at the stake as a heretic.  Place the N.O. Mass and Cranmer's "Lord's Supper" service side-by-side and they are almost identical!  In fact, there are areas of Cranmer's Mass that are more reverent than the N.O. Mass!  So, if Cranmer's Mass was condemned then - how is it not today?  With our understanding of Catholicism, if it was wrong then, it is wrong now.  Therefore, it would be a very logical conclusion to believe that the N.O. Mass was never truly promulgated as a law of the Church (Pope Paul VI even stated such), the TLM was NEVER reduced as the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite and therefore is STILL the Ordinary Form - and the N.O. Mass is an usurper rite designed by heretics, sneaked into the official structure of the Church through an ecclesiastical loophole and given the stolen title of "Ordinary Form" so it could do maximum damage among the Faithful.  It takes true blindness not to see that the Church is in her worst crisis to date, and the prevalence of a defaced, Protestantized Mass erroneously dubbed as the "Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite" along with a conquered "pastoral" council are the reasons.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Licit to attend weekly NO Masses with abuses? - by Nic - 12-17-2010, 08:13 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)