Invalidity of Mass according to sedevacantists?

[commenter]

poche:

That is part of another movement referred to as the “Resistance.” They recognize that Pope Francis is the Pope, but they don’t obey him.

That would be SSPX!

Not exactly. The Resistance(s) is (are) an offshoot of SSPX. They claim to be faithful to the spirit and vision of Archbishop L. They regard the recent head of SSPX (Bishop Fellay) as being overly conciliatory to the Vatican.

Individuals (in the Resistance, or in SSPX) may vary to a degree in the Sedevacantists scale. It’s not an “all or nothing.” The SSPX itself as an organization rejects sedevacantism.

 

[Maximus1]

The Church is so burdened by catering to these types of things. In a faith that is really about the substance of loving neighbor, charity, and empathy, so much energy and resources are expended over such UNRELATED STUFF.
The faith tells us feed, give drink, welcome, heal and visit the least, or adopt mercy and invite ones own Judgement of Mercy, which brings salvation. Instead we go borderline insane over matters of vanity. Whose symbolic ritual is " THE RIGHT ONE" to remind us to do something Christ-like, instead of doing something Christ-like.
It really is like a fight to the death over the proper post-it reminder instead of the thing intended to be reminded of.
And people invest passion and rage. In the packaging!
Does anyone seriously think they are pleasing God and blazing a path to salvation by fighting over rituals. Like wheat or Yuca in the physical aspect of the real presence? When the issue is soggy damaged hosts or not.

 

[Bataar]

Alright, while I do not hold view that OF can be invalid because it is “modernist” or because of poor catechesis of the Priest celebrating it, some traditionalists do and I don’t quite understand the idea.

Even if sedevacantists of utmost radicality were right and Vatican 2 was not valid (again, I don’t hold view it is, I’m just stating this for sake of argument), why would Novus Ordo ever be invalid? After all, Mass does not have to be approved by Church to be valid- take look at some groups who were in schism historically. Many forms of Liturgies developed in communities with valid Apostolic succession, Priesthood and sacraments and some were not even approved by Catholic Church- yet historically, we regard them as valid. Why would Novus Ordo ever be an exception? What is the logic behind that? Even heresies did not invalidate Liturgies, as we see with Nestorian Churches. Only heresy to invalidate Mass would be one of denying Holy Trinity, or one denying Sacraments- particularly Eucharist (reasons why Protestants do not have valid Liturgies, or one of them). As long as valid Priesthood is present (which again, Novus Ordo Vatican 2 Catholic Church surely does have even according to most extreme traditionalists), there is no valid basis for Mass to be simply invalid and hence Eucharist not really present.

There is also no basis on why would heresy of Modernism do away with valid Priesthood (as generally Vatican 2 does not change anything about understanding of Priesthood) and no basis on why it would do away with valid understanding of Eucharist or Triune God- especially in sense Vatican 2 is accused of. I find every argument for invalidity of NO being simply false leap of logic, but I never had a chance to talk to someone more educated about this matter. Does anyone know why do Sedevacantists or similar groups reject validity of Sacrament of Eucharist in current form of Mass, or how do they justify it even with above things in mind?

It actually does make a difference. If Yuca bread is used, for example, it will remain bread. There is no way that a host made from yuca bread can become the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

It actually does make a difference. If Yuca bread is used, for example, it will remain bread.

What is Yuca bread? I get it would not be licit matter but would it be completely invalid? Both leavened and unleavened bread should be alright to use, right?

 

[Bataar]

Bataar:

It actually does make a difference. If Yuca bread is used, for example, it will remain bread.

What is Yuca bread? I get it would not be licit matter but would it be completely invalid? Both leavened and unleavened bread should be alright to use, right?

No. In the Latin Rite, only unleavened bread made with wheat and water may be used.

 

[Bataar]

If the proper matter is not used, then the consecration is invalid.

However, that’s not the question asked by the OP. He’s asking why some sedevacantists say that the Novus Ordo is invalid simply because the pope was not validly elected. Even if the papacy is indeed vacant, having the proper minister, matter, form, and intention would still render a celebration of the Novus Ordo valid.

What is Yuca bread? I get it would not be licit matter but would it be completely invalid?

A quick online search reveals that it contains cheese. Doesn’t sound valid to me!
[/quote]

A quick summary as to why some sedevacantists believe sacraments are invalid is because the form of the sacrament was changed after Vatican II. From the ordination of priests to the consecration of the Eucharist. If the change in words does anything to change the meaning or intent of the sacrament then the sacrament is not valid. They believe that after the words changed, the meaning and intent changed so they are no longer valid.

 

[Bataar]

A very interesting book on the subject is Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI. Yes, it’s by sedevacantist priest Fr. Cekada, so as long as you keep that in mind when he’s discussing his opinions, you should be good. It’s the parts of the book where he’s actually quoting from the creators of the Mass and using their own explanations for the changes and why they were made that really make you think.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

If I tell myself that there is no Pope then I can continue to do whatever.

Do not take the following as an endorsement of what the sedevacantists (SVs) think.

SVs do not “put themselves in the Pope’s place”. They believe that there is a period for as long as 61 years (depending on what SVs you talk to) when the Church has been without a pope. They do not try to do or say anything a pope would, it is just as though we are in an interregnum between popes, but a very, very long one. They do establish chapels, ordain priests, and consecrate bishops to ensure that everything that their faithful need is available to them, as they see the situation. They make the presupposition that not only is the Holy See vacant, but that the bishops and priests have fallen into heresy en masse. (There are some variations on the theme, such as sedeprivationists, materialiter-formaliter SVs, proponents of the “Siri thesis”, and even those who say Benedict XVI is still the Pope — the latter are not SVs now, but they will have to reconsider things when Benedict dies.) There are some who object to one SV bishop’s episcopal lineage, and some who object to that of another SV bishop, and so on. In short, it’s a mixed bag and they’re “all across the boards”. It is, to say the least, interesting.

 

[Lormar]

Rose is right. I know them well. The word changes in the consecration of the Mass is why they said the Mass was invalid.

They also do not think that the new Rite of Ordination is valid so, even though the words of consecration have been returned to “for many” they do not think there are any valid priests.

 

[JSRG]

CradleRC58:

Sede clergy omit the “una cum” in the Te Igitur, which is the first prayer of the Canon.

They condemn omitting prayers of the Tridentine Mass per the OF, but then do it themselves.

Hypocrisy is not a virtue.

The Una Cum can’t be said if there is no pope. The entire purpose of the prayer is to state you’re offering the Mass in union with the pope. If there’s no pope, you can’t offer the mass in union with him.

Random question. Does that get left out in masses performed after a pope has died but before the election of the next one?

 

[poche]

Sometimes how we respond to others in these matters is a matter of empathy, love of neighbor, and charity. If people who are Novus Ordo are nasty to people who prefer the Latin mass then it kind of blows away their claim to love of neighbor.
I remember one time hearing a nun say how she hated the people who loved the Latin mass.

 

[Maximus1]

If I reflect, I have no strong feelings either way on this issue. I think there is beauty in both.
Your point is a good one. You need to be mindful to be patient when passions are involved. Although Swift for example does tweak those patience as we read how to properly break an egg in Gulliver’s Travels.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Yeah, that makes sense then.

 

[Bataar]

Bataar:

CradleRC58:

Sede clergy omit the “una cum” in the Te Igitur, which is the first prayer of the Canon.

They condemn omitting prayers of the Tridentine Mass per the OF, but then do it themselves.

Hypocrisy is not a virtue.

The Una Cum can’t be said if there is no pope. The entire purpose of the prayer is to state you’re offering the Mass in union with the pope. If there’s no pope, you can’t offer the mass in union with him.

Random question. Does that get left out in masses performed after a pope has died but before the election of the next one?

I would assume it does, but I honestly don’t know.

 

[Bataar]

If anyone is interested, here’s a video of Fr. Cekada explaining the situation of validity of the Mass after the change to the Roman Canon.