What should I do?
#11
(04-19-2018, 02:12 AM)Credidi Propter Wrote: Perhaps you could pray vespers. You can do that yourself, wherever you happen to be, and the reverence depends on you.

(04-19-2018, 10:59 AM)angeltime Wrote: Peace.....sorry, but I think the question was about "what" is irreverant - and all the detail came out as to what you might like, not like, or what to possibly expect when you are searching for a good NO Mass.

True enough, and I appreciate everyone's contributions to the thread. :)
"For the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists."
- Pope St. Pius X

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."
- 2 Timothy 4:3-4

"Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
[-] The following 1 user Likes SeekerofChrist's post:
  • angeltime
Reply
#12
Remember that the Ordinary Form of the Mass (which people commonly call the Novus Ordo) is a valid Mass, and no matter how "reverent" or "irreverent" it is, it's still the re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary. Some trads recommed never attending the OF and to only attend the Extraordinary Form (aka TLM), but the Church requires us to assist at Mass in a Catholic rite every Sunday, so if the OF is all that's available and you DON'T go, you are still committing a mortal sin.

I'll say more later but I have to go... :P
Corpus Christi, salva me.

Check out my new blog: A Young Popish American
[-] The following 2 users Like LaudeturIesus's post:
  • angeltime, havok579257
Reply
#13
(04-19-2018, 01:28 PM)LaudeturIesus Wrote: Remember that the Ordinary Form of the Mass (which people commonly call the Novus Ordo) is a valid Mass, and no matter how "reverent" or "irreverent" it is, it's still the re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary. Some trads recommed never attending the OF and to only attend the Extraordinary Form (aka TLM), but the Church requires us to assist at Mass in a Catholic rite every Sunday, so if the OF is all that's available and you DON'T go, you are still committing a mortal sin.

Yes, I do understand.  I've come across some traditionalists who say to not attend an NO Mass, no matter what, but as you have said, the Church says it is valid and I certainly have no authority to say otherwise.

Quote:I'll say more later but I have to go... :P


I look forward to it! :)
"For the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists."
- Pope St. Pius X

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."
- 2 Timothy 4:3-4

"Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
[-] The following 1 user Likes SeekerofChrist's post:
  • LaudeturIesus
Reply
#14
(04-19-2018, 01:50 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 01:28 PM)LaudeturIesus Wrote: Remember that the Ordinary Form of the Mass (which people commonly call the Novus Ordo) is a valid Mass, and no matter how "reverent" or "irreverent" it is, it's still the re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary. Some trads recommed never attending the OF and to only attend the Extraordinary Form (aka TLM), but the Church requires us to assist at Mass in a Catholic rite every Sunday, so if the OF is all that's available and you DON'T go, you are still committing a mortal sin.

Yes, I do understand.  I've come across some traditionalists who say to not attend an NO Mass, no matter what, but as you have said, the Church says it is valid and I certainly have no authority to say otherwise.

We discussed that in this thread, recently.

Different traddies take different takes on the matter.

I won't re-hash the discussions, but the argument is more than just about validity, since even a "Black Mass" is "valid".

Educate yourself and your conscience, then decide what you need to do to nourish your Faith and protect it.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • angeltime
Reply
#15
(04-19-2018, 05:26 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 01:50 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 01:28 PM)LaudeturIesus Wrote: Remember that the Ordinary Form of the Mass (which people commonly call the Novus Ordo) is a valid Mass, and no matter how "reverent" or "irreverent" it is, it's still the re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary. Some trads recommed never attending the OF and to only attend the Extraordinary Form (aka TLM), but the Church requires us to assist at Mass in a Catholic rite every Sunday, so if the OF is all that's available and you DON'T go, you are still committing a mortal sin.

Yes, I do understand.  I've come across some traditionalists who say to not attend an NO Mass, no matter what, but as you have said, the Church says it is valid and I certainly have no authority to say otherwise.

We discussed that in this thread, recently.

Different traddies take different takes on the matter.

I won't re-hash the discussions, but the argument is more than just about validity, since even a "Black Mass" is "valid".

Educate yourself and your conscience, then decide what you need to do to nourish your Faith and protect it.

A "Black Mass" is not "valid," because it's not a Mass in any true sense. It is a satanic mockery-copy of a Mass in which stolen Hosts consecrated from a true Mass are desecrated. So unless you have a different definition of a "Black Mass," whatever you're saying doesn't make any sense.

It's not debatable; a trad Catholic who obstinately refuses to go to an Ordinary Form Mass on a holy day of obligation when that is his only option, still objectively commits a mortal sin, under normal circumstances (emphasis here).

I sincerely believe that any trad who thinks otherwise has a mentality no different than a Protestant, picking and choosing their private interpretation ("consciense") of Church teaching. Canon law does not say "the faithful are bound to assist at Mass in a Catholic rite on Sundays and other holy days of obligation, unless those with an informed consciense feel that the only available Mass in their area does not conform to their personal liturgical tastes and beliefs, and therefore are dispensed from the obligation to attend Mass."

As long as we're talking about the average OF Mass as celebrated in the US...
[-] The following 1 user Likes LaudeturIesus's post:
  • havok579257
Reply
#16
(04-19-2018, 07:04 PM)LaudeturIesus Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 05:26 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 01:50 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 01:28 PM)LaudeturIesus Wrote: Remember that the Ordinary Form of the Mass (which people commonly call the Novus Ordo) is a valid Mass, and no matter how "reverent" or "irreverent" it is, it's still the re-presentation of the Sacrifice at Calvary. Some trads recommed never attending the OF and to only attend the Extraordinary Form (aka TLM), but the Church requires us to assist at Mass in a Catholic rite every Sunday, so if the OF is all that's available and you DON'T go, you are still committing a mortal sin.

Yes, I do understand.  I've come across some traditionalists who say to not attend an NO Mass, no matter what, but as you have said, the Church says it is valid and I certainly have no authority to say otherwise.

We discussed that in this thread, recently.

Different traddies take different takes on the matter.

I won't re-hash the discussions, but the argument is more than just about validity, since even a "Black Mass" is "valid".

Educate yourself and your conscience, then decide what you need to do to nourish your Faith and protect it.

A "Black Mass" is not "valid," because it's not a Mass in any true sense. It is a satanic mockery-copy of a Mass in which stolen Hosts consecrated from a true Mass are desecrated. So unless you have a different definition of a "Black Mass," whatever you're saying doesn't make any sense.

It's not debatable; a trad Catholic who obstinately refuses to go to an Ordinary Form Mass on a holy day of obligation when that is his only option, still objectively commits a mortal sin, under normal circumstances (emphasis here).

I sincerely believe that any trad who thinks otherwise has a mentality no different than a Protestant, picking and choosing their private interpretation ("consciense") of Church teaching. Canon law does not say "the faithful are bound to assist at Mass in a Catholic rite on Sundays and other holy days of obligation, unless those with an informed consciense feel that the only available Mass in their area does not conform to their personal liturgical tastes and beliefs, and therefore are dispensed from the obligation to attend Mass."

As long as we're talking about the average OF Mass as celebrated in the US...

I think if we want to continue the discussion on the other thread, it should be done there. That is why I directed the person that way.

If one is going to decide to act by either going or omitting that attendance, it better be because of an informed conscience. As I said over there, that's the only think I am interested in encouraging. That people educated themselves on the arguments rather than just the tit-for-tat back and forth.

You are right when to look at what has been billed in Oklahoma City as a "Black Mass". That is not a Mass, as you correctly describe.

Originally, the "Black Mass" was meant as a real Mass, in which a validly ordained priest who had become a Satanist prayed a Satanic inversion of the Mass, but with the proper words of consecration in order to validly confect the Eucharist for the sole purpose of then desecrating the Blessed Sacrament through various, usually sexually-oriented rituals.

Because it was rare that you would find such a priest, other rituals involving stolen Hosts, etc. were invented.

That is a valid Mass, so is the Mass of a Schismatic, etc.

The whole point is what you cite. Canon Law says we need to attend a Catholic rite, not a "valid" Mass.

The point : "validity" is not the argument to be making, because even with schismatics it falls flat. An orthodox Mass is "valid". You cannot go to one on a Sunday. It does not fulfill your duty, and it would be a grave sin of scandal to do so. "But ... it's valid ..."

I think the point is clear.

If people were so refusing on the basis of a whim, then you're totally right. But it's not just a whim, again, as was clearly pointed out at the other thread. To have a solid reason to justify a conscientious objection, though, it's not "private interpretation" at all. Your conscience is the proximate rule of your moral actions. If you violate it, you sin.

If you want, at the other thread, to discuss the merits of what was presented there, great, have at it, but let's not separate the issues by disparate threads. Let's have that discussion in context.
Reply
#17
I would love it if we could get back to the OPs question. I to see a ton on here from trads about going to a reverent NO mass compared to going to a non reverent one. So for all those who say this, what is the line? Please don’t bring up clown masses, dancing masses or what not. All on here know those are not reverent masses and would not argue otherwise. I and I imagine the op are referring to the average NO mass. What makes one reverent enough to attend compared to another?
[-] The following 1 user Likes havok579257's post:
  • MagisterMusicae
Reply
#18
(04-19-2018, 11:19 PM)havok579257 Wrote: I would love it if we could get back to the OPs question.  I to see a ton on here from trads about going to a reverent NO mass compared to going to a non reverent one.  So for all those who say this, what is the line?  Please don’t bring up clown masses, dancing masses or what not.  All on here know those are not reverent masses and would not argue otherwise.  I and I imagine the op are referring to the average NO mass.  What makes one reverent enough to attend compared to another?

If it helps, Havok, that was the reason I wanted to redirect to the other thread for discussion and not have it here, since it distracts from the question.

The OP asked about the "valid" question, so I wanted to direct this person to that discussion.

I'll leave those who wish to deal with it to do so.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • havok579257
Reply
#19
(04-19-2018, 11:30 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 11:19 PM)havok579257 Wrote: I would love it if we could get back to the OPs question.  I to see a ton on here from trads about going to a reverent NO mass compared to going to a non reverent one.  So for all those who say this, what is the line?  Please don’t bring up clown masses, dancing masses or what not.  All on here know those are not reverent masses and would not argue otherwise.  I and I imagine the op are referring to the average NO mass.  What makes one reverent enough to attend compared to another?

If it helps, Havok, that was the reason I wanted to redirect to the other thread for discussion and not have it here, since it distracts from the question.

The OP asked about the "valid" question, so I wanted to direct this person to that discussion.

I'll leave those who wish to deal with it to do so.
I wasn’t specifically referring to you.  Just the fact this has gotten off topic which I have contributed to also.
[-] The following 1 user Likes havok579257's post:
  • MagisterMusicae
Reply
#20
(04-19-2018, 11:42 PM)havok579257 Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 11:30 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(04-19-2018, 11:19 PM)havok579257 Wrote: I would love it if we could get back to the OPs question.  I to see a ton on here from trads about going to a reverent NO mass compared to going to a non reverent one.  So for all those who say this, what is the line?  Please don’t bring up clown masses, dancing masses or what not.  All on here know those are not reverent masses and would not argue otherwise.  I and I imagine the op are referring to the average NO mass.  What makes one reverent enough to attend compared to another?

If it helps, Havok, that was the reason I wanted to redirect to the other thread for discussion and not have it here, since it distracts from the question.

The OP asked about the "valid" question, so I wanted to direct this person to that discussion.

I'll leave those who wish to deal with it to do so.
I wasn’t specifically referring to you.  Just the fact this has gotten off topic which I have contributed to also.

I know, Havok. I wasn't taking any offense.

My only gripe is accusations of grave sin. None of us can see into their conscience or soul, and it does no one any good to suggest such things. 

We all know the law, some of us feel conscious bound to be "conscientious objectors." Such objectors could be wrong in their analysis, but just like calling such an objector in war a traitor does not one any service, I think we can say the same for the cry of "mortal sin".

That just poisons any hope of having a productive discussion.

It's a gentleman's discussion to have (elsewhere) and the very fact that we even need to have that discussion is not our fault but the fault of so many Churchmen who have failed us over the last 50 years.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)