Thoughts on going to the NO
#11
Again I have to show my ignorance: why is there doubt over the validity of episcopal ordinations in the NO (or if the issue is not the NO, then since a particular time, or whatever...?)
Reply
#12
(06-11-2009, 08:40 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: Again I have to show my ignorance: why is there doubt over the validity of episcopal ordinations in the NO (or if the issue is not the NO, then since a particular time, or whatever...?)

Pope Leo XIII declared that the Anglican rites of ordination are invalid:

"And so, assenting entirely to the decrees of all the departed Pontiffs in this case, and confirming them most fully and, as it were, renewing them by Our authority, of Our own inspiration and certain knowledge We pronounce and declare that ordinations enacted according to the Anglican rite have hitherto been and are invalid and entirely void." (Denzinger-Schonmetzer 3319)
Reply
#13
(06-11-2009, 09:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(06-11-2009, 08:40 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: Again I have to show my ignorance: why is there doubt over the validity of episcopal ordinations in the NO (or if the issue is not the NO, then since a particular time, or whatever...?)

Pope Leo XIII declared that the Anglican rites of ordination are invalid:

"And so, assenting entirely to the decrees of all the departed Pontiffs in this case, and confirming them most fully and, as it were, renewing them by Our authority, of Our own inspiration and certain knowledge We pronounce and declare that ordinations enacted according to the Anglican rite have hitherto been and are invalid and entirely void." (Denzinger-Schonmetzer 3319)

Got you so far. Now is the assertion that the NO rite of ordination = the Anglican rite of ordination? What is the evidence for this? I assume it is a question about the texts or in some other way about the form of the sacrament? Is there also a question about the matter?
Reply
#14
This was split out of the "Concise reason for SSPX" thread with a vote button (by Quis I assume)-- that is the context, it was never ment to cause an argument but OP decided to go there.  Not interested in dicussing this further the only reason I originally posted was because the thread claimed there was going to be no argument since it was about each persons personal reason for SSPX or not SSPX.  I had recent ly been doing nothing but staying mostly in non controversial threads

Didi got to make his point and I said nothing.  Others did but not really to take him to task except for reason 4 which anyone could guess at and probably be right, but some folks need everything spelled out.   Sorry I'm not spelln'


as the guy that got arrested in...


There was even a caveat for the three people on the board I know are in a situation where they have no TLM.

So in short I did not start this thread.

If y'all want to discuss it have at it, but I ain't bitin'
Reply
#15
(06-11-2009, 09:22 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote:
(06-11-2009, 09:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(06-11-2009, 08:40 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: Again I have to show my ignorance: why is there doubt over the validity of episcopal ordinations in the NO (or if the issue is not the NO, then since a particular time, or whatever...?)

Pope Leo XIII declared that the Anglican rites of ordination are invalid:

"And so, assenting entirely to the decrees of all the departed Pontiffs in this case, and confirming them most fully and, as it were, renewing them by Our authority, of Our own inspiration and certain knowledge We pronounce and declare that ordinations enacted according to the Anglican rite have hitherto been and are invalid and entirely void." (Denzinger-Schonmetzer 3319)

Got you so far. Now is the assertion that the NO rite of ordination = the Anglican rite of ordination? What is the evidence for this? I assume it is a question about the texts or in some other way about the form of the sacrament? Is there also a question about the matter?

I thought by "why is there a doubt about the validity of episcopal ordinations in the NO?" that you meant "why do Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo Mass doubt the validity of Episcopalian (i.e. American Anglican) orders?" I feel really dumb. I guess I should have wondered what Anglicans had to do with the Novus Ordo
Reply
#16
(06-12-2009, 02:30 AM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(06-11-2009, 09:22 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote:
(06-11-2009, 09:00 PM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(06-11-2009, 08:40 PM)flannerywannabe Wrote: Again I have to show my ignorance: why is there doubt over the validity of episcopal ordinations in the NO (or if the issue is not the NO, then since a particular time, or whatever...?)

Pope Leo XIII declared that the Anglican rites of ordination are invalid:

"And so, assenting entirely to the decrees of all the departed Pontiffs in this case, and confirming them most fully and, as it were, renewing them by Our authority, of Our own inspiration and certain knowledge We pronounce and declare that ordinations enacted according to the Anglican rite have hitherto been and are invalid and entirely void." (Denzinger-Schonmetzer 3319)

Got you so far. Now is the assertion that the NO rite of ordination = the Anglican rite of ordination? What is the evidence for this? I assume it is a question about the texts or in some other way about the form of the sacrament? Is there also a question about the matter?

I thought by "why is there a doubt about the validity of episcopal ordinations in the NO?" that you meant "why do Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo Mass doubt the validity of Episcopalian (i.e. American Anglican) orders?" I feel really dumb. I guess I should have wondered what Anglicans had to do with the Novus Ordo

Prolly the use of the word "episcopal" tripped you: you were thinking those guys in England, not Catholic bishops. :)
Reply
#17
My thoughts on going to the Novus Ordo:

I like hearing the whole Mass in my native tongue.

I like hearing the most important words, the words of consecration, in my own language.

I like being able to see the priest as he consecrates the bread and wine.

I like being able to receive my Lord under the species of His Precious Blood in the chalice.

I like being able to sing hymns as a member of the congregation, and not just listen to a choir.

I like the responsorial Psalm.

I like having substantial readings from the Old Testament.

I like singing the Gospel Acclamation.

I like the Prayers of the Faithful.

I like it when people realize the true Theological significance of the Sign of Peace.

I like being able to pray all of the words of the Lord's Prayer.

I like being able to hear most everything that is being said(sorry if that seems redundant).



Reply
#18
(06-14-2009, 05:23 PM)lumine Wrote: My thoughts on going to the Novus Ordo:

I like hearing the whole Mass in my native tongue.
That is not an integral part of the NO. In fact, the original documents which established it, maintained that Latin was to be used and knowledge of Latin to be increased in the laity. Non Latin was allowed when it was needed (missionaries and such) though.

Quote:I like being able to see the priest as he consecrates the bread and wine.
Again, this is not part of the NO. The rubrics are written for priests facing the altar, not the people.

Quote:I like being able to sing hymns as a member of the congregation, and not just listen to a choir.
Why can't you join the choir ;) Also, the modern music used isn't part of the NO.

Quote:I like it when people realize the true Theological significance of the Sign of Peace.
The sign of peace is in the TLM, but in the NO, it has become a social gathering at best, and at worst a grope fest.



Reply
#19
Quote from Rosarium:
That is not an integral part of the NO. In fact, the original documents which established it, maintained that Latin was to be used and knowledge of Latin to be increased in the laity. Non Latin was allowed when it was needed (missionaries and such) though.


Hi Rosarium,
Rome gave the United States permission years ago to use the vernacular for the Mass, so in the U.S. according to the Bishops it is an integral part of Mass.

Reply
#20
(06-14-2009, 05:49 PM)lumine Wrote: Hi Rosarium,
Rome gave the United States permission years ago to use the vernacular for the Mass, so in the U.S. according to the Bishops it is an integral part of Mass.
The problems go beyond the language. The NO rubrics do not allow for the vernacular as default, so liking the NO because of it is a tenuous reasoning. It can be removed as easily as it was instituted.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)