I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae
#53
(08-19-2013, 08:06 AM)Basilios Wrote:
(08-19-2013, 08:02 AM)2Vermont Wrote:
(08-19-2013, 02:30 AM)JoniCath Wrote: Validity has nothing to do with my reason for boycotting the NO.  IMO. This Mass has done great harm to my Church & I cannot go on any longer,  enabling it. I don't believe that it is the work of God.

But this is the struggle I have.  If we question whether it is the work of God, then aren't we questioning its validity implicitly? 

Just like I said earlier. Validity and the other ritualistic elements are separate. The validity is down to the consecration and that's it. Since the new mass has valid words for consecration it is a valid mass. The rubrics and organization of the ritual might be horrible as I agree but the Mass is valid, and the Catholic Church demands we attend a valid Catholic Mass on Sundays and holy days.

Validity involves form, matter and intention.  The form was changed in the vernacular ("for the many" to "for all") and then later revised...but only recently.  Why did  the Catholic Church even think of changing the words at the very beginning (and allow it to remain that way for 50 years)? It seems to me that the intention was to change the form from what it was for 1500 years prior despite the fact that St Pius V said not to do it.  I have a problem with just saying "Oh, that was an "oopsie" let's forget that it ever happened in the first place and was allowed to continue for decades."

It's the same question I have for all of the major changes in the sacraments....WHY??? 
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: I'm first finding this: Letter on Novus Ordo Missae - by 2Vermont - 08-19-2013, 08:18 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)