Validity of None-Tridentine Mass

[CradleCath]

They better be valid as I’ve been going to them most of my life. But the new words of Consecration and some of the bread they use do have always bothered me and I’m surprised most just take it in stride,

As I said in another post, in another thread, at every Holy Thursday evening Mass for YEARS in a previous parish, the priest “served” the “Eucharist” (the “hosts” were cookies) from baskets with blue & red gingham napkins.This…plus the fact that the majority of people who participated in the washing of the feet were women… made of this Mass a travesty of the Last Supper. During those years, the 70’s, we lived far from the city with access to no other Catholic Church within 40 miles. My husband & I, of course, did not participate in the reception of the “host” knowing that we’d be receiving a cookie & nothing else. Since we were the only ones left sitting in the pew during “communion”, it was embarrassing to say the least, but to participate (in my opinion) would be giving approval to the whole sordid mess.

some even persecuting you for even doubting some novelties they believe without questioning.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

I jump in having read only the first few pages. Just some thoughts:

1. The Novus Ordo Mass is Valid
2. Popes are not bound by decisions of prior popes on discipline. Remember: "What ever you bind…Whatever you loose. That does have meaning.
3. The words of consecration are a - This is my body b - This is the cup of my blood. Anything else is descriptive.
4. If you are at mass where there is a cake to be consecrated - walk out and go to another catholic Church.
5. Holy Mother church gives us an option of the two forms of mass. Both are equally valid and efficacious. Neither is better than the other.

Abuses took and take place under either form. All abuses are wrong. I remember pre Vatican II masses, the Tridentine Mass, where mass was celebrated in less than 15 minutes. Some as short of 12. I heard of some shorter, but did not witness them. it was not the form of the mass that caused the abuses, it was the individual priest, just as those with the Novus Ordo.

Pray for priests. Do so daily. They all need our prayers greatly.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[SFD]

DeaconEdB:

1. The words of consecration are a - This is my body b - This is the cup of my blood. Anything else is descriptive.

This has never been defined by the Church. However, we do have this to go by:
THE CATECHISM By Decree of THE HOLY COUNCIL OF TRENT:

Published by command of Pope Saint Pius V: “We are then firmly to believe (certo credendum est)," that the form for the consecration of the wine “consists in the following words: This is the chalice of my blood, of the new and eternal testament, the mystery of faith, which shall be shed for you and for many, to the remission of sins.” (Part II, chap. 4, par. 21) And immediately below in par. 22, we read: "Concerning this form no one can doubt (Verum de hac forma nemo dubitare poterit) . . . it is plain that no other words constitute the form (perspicuum est, aliam formam constituendam non esse).”

We can be CERTAIN that this is the correct form. We cannot be certain that the “short form” is valid. Can’t you see why one would prudently doubt the “short form”?

SFD

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

If the form we presently use has been OKed by Rome, which it has, it is a correct form. To deny this would be to deny the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I for one cannot and will not believe that the words OKed for consecration by Rome would be incorrect and not validly consecrate the Eucharist.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[CradleCath]

I jump in having read only the first few pages. Just some thoughts:

1. The Novus Ordo Mass is Valid

I do & for Pope Benedict, also.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

I do & for Pope Benedict, also.

I tried to answer your response to answer one by one, but this is all I get. ??? Do you know hoe to quote to block off and break up??
Deacon Ed B

 

[SFD]

If the form we presently use has been OKed by Rome, which it has, it is a correct form.

I understand that is your position.

To deny this would be to deny the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I for one cannot and will not believe that the words OKed for consecration by Rome would be incorrect and not validly consecrate the Eucharist.

No, it would not. It is quite possible to take a minimalist position and stick to that which you are certain…and leave the ultimate solution or explanation of the situation to others.

Amidst the confusion of the various (deliberate, mind you) mistranslations in the NOM…can’t you see why some might considerate it of doubtful validity and reject it for what has already been established as a certainty?

SFD

 

[I_Believe]

I tried to answer your response to answer one by one, but this is all I get. ??? Do you know hoe to quote to block off and break up??
Deacon Ed B

Do you know how to spell, and write a coherent sentence ?

Do you know hoe to quote to block off and break up??


lol, just kidding of corce

Edit to correct: I menat "course "

oh dear, see what you started ?

Edit again: I meant meant. :whacky:

 

[SFD]

LilyM:

My argument is equally applicable to condemning rites as well as people. And choosing a differerent rite absolutely doesn’t constitute condemnation of another rite.

What about the Anglican Rite? If you choose that rite would it be a rejection of the Latin Rite? Oh, not explicitly…right? We couldn’t really tell if you rejected anything…is that your position?

SFD

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

…can’t you see why some might considerate it of doubtful validity and reject it for what has already been established as a certainty?

SFD

Correct me if I am wrong, but did not the Holy Father use these English words for the consecration during the Novus Ordo? That would certainly be good enough for me. If not for you, than all I can say, is you will be in my prayers.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Do you know how to spell, and write a coherent sentence ?

Do you know hoe to quote to block off and break up??


lol, just kidding of corce

Edit to correct: I menat "course "

oh dear, see what you started ?

Edit again: I meant meant. :whacky:

Let me rephrase. Do you know how to use the **quote **enclosed in ** ] and the /quote enclosed in ** ]? I typed it this way, because to type out would put it in the quoted boxes. Look at the quoted boxes and see how the quote is bracketed at the beginning and end of each quoted section. If you use that you can separate a persons post.
Confusing enough for ya??? I had to ask also, So you are in good company. At least I try to be.
Prayers & blessings
Deaco Ed B

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Now you really have me going. My response should have been for **CradleCath. **

 

[I_Believe]

Now you really have me going. My response should have been for **CradleCath. **

lol, I did say I was just kidding around

Sometimes I just can’t resist being goofy

 

[CradleCath]

I tried to answer your response to answer one by one, but this is all I get. ??? Do you know hoe to quote to block off and break up??
Deacon Ed B

This is just plain rude. Yes, I know how to quote & by “block off & break up”…I’ll just assume that you mean separate paragraphs & distinguish between your words & mine. Again, yes I do. I have this one problem, however,…it’s called “very little time”. I still own & run my flower shop…a 50 hr. week job (70 & more as the autumn & Christmas seasons arrive) & I gave up on my house keepers a couple of years ago. They don’t seem to want to get down on their knees to scrub a floor & with all my children grown…I have time to do it myself…IF I work hard. They loved their mops & swiffers, etc. I prefer for my floors to be clean.

In between posting here this morning, I have taken 2 grandchildren to school, cleaned my oven & scubbed my hardwoods in the kitchen, the woodwork, the fridge, microwave & taken the cooktop on my island apart to clean it deeply. It’s now almost two o’clock & I’m done. I’ll wax the hardwoods after eveyone goes to bed, tonight…BECAUSE loooonngg hours start at the shop immediatly following Labor Day.

Now, can you not read an imperfectly composed post?? Because I did ask you some questions & I haven’t seen your answers. I’ll be waiting.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

This is just plain rude. Yes, I know how to quote & by “block off & break up”…I’ll just assume that you mean separate paragraphs & distinguish between your words & mine. Again, yes I do. I have this one problem, however,…it’s called “very little time”. I still own & run my flower shop…a 50 hr. week job (70 & more as the autumn & Christmas seasons arrive) & I gave up on my house keepers a couple of years ago. They don’t seem to want to get down on their knees to scrub a floor & with all my children grown…I have time to do it myself…IF I work hard. They loved their mops & swiffers, etc. I prefer for my floors to be clean.

In between posting here this morning, I have taken 2 grandchildren to school, cleaned my oven & scubbed my hardwoods in the kitchen, the woodwork, the fridge, microwave & taken the cooktop on my island apart to clean it deeply. It’s now almost two o’clock & I’m done. I’ll wax the hardwoods after eveyone goes to bed, tonight…BECAUSE loooonngg hours start at the shop immediatly following Labor Day.

Now, can you not read an imperfectly composed post?? Because I did ask you some questions & I haven’t seen your answers. I’ll be waiting.

WOW. First let me apologize. I gather by the tone of your post I quoted that you are having a bad or stressful day. For this I am sorry, and will hold you in prayer. If you are not and are just irked at me, I am also sorrow and will still hold you in prayer. If you are not irked with me, thats OK too, as I will still hold you in prayer.

I printed out your post # 85 so as to be able to address your questions and or comments. I will simply list your questions and then answer them .

1. This one may be touchy because you seem to be making assumptions about that which you have no knowledge. You doubt I’ve attended a real Novus Ordo Mass???You know I don’t like questions??? ( I answer questions all the time.)
   ANS: I have attended the mass where it has been in Latin and English, contrary to your conclusions. It has been some time, but I do prefer the all English mass, which is also our option. Your conclusion that I don’t understand Latin is both right and wrong. I had Logic, Epistemology, Rational Psychology, Cosmology and Metaphysics all in Latin, where the textbooks, lectures and exams were in Latin. My theology was also in Latin. This has been some time ago. If you have heard of use it or lose it, that applies as I have not used Latin in this manner since 1964. However, I am not totally ignorant of it. I do however prefer my mother tongue, i.e., English. What you call “My Novus Ordo Mass” is now in English. At times Gregorian Chant is used, most of the time not.
2. You speak of binding discipline here and the fact that you think Pope John Paul II was so completely against the wishes of another pope???

ans: Nothing of dogma has changed. Discipline and practice has. This is perfectly within the GOD GIVEN authority of any pope. I for one will not be one to question a popes legitimate and lawful practice of his authority. Simply stated, I totally respect his acting within the God given authority which he has by virtue of being the Vicar of Christ on Earth.

1. You correctly state both masses are equally valid and then question or wonder whether one produces more grace and then list the fact that mass attendance is lower, that only 30 % of Catholics believe in the real presence, confession is down, priests abusing children, seminaries being pink etc. and ask whether it is because graces produced by the “valid” masses are unequal in quality and power because if "inferior liturgy.

ans: The only correct part here is when you say both forms of the mass are equally valid. The graces produced by a mass are infinite. It is Metaphysically impossible for one mass to produce more grace than the other, as infinity has no degrees. The different things which you list are not caused by Vatican II, nor the Novus Ordo mass, but by our society in general. As I have listed in other posts. we have had the Cultural and sexual revolution here in the 60’s. Certainly not caused by Vatican II, but occurring at the same time. Prayer removed from school, Roe v Wade, again not caused by Vatican II but occurring at the same time. We have had the rise of the internet with all kind of things available to anyone from young children to adults, again not caused by Vatican II or the Novus Ordo mass. We have had a rise of Gay Pride (properly = gay infamy) homosexual marriage, all of these certainly not caused by Vatican II or the Novus Ordo. Priest abuse was taking place before Vatican II, to which I personally can attest due to childhood experiences. Even today, there are things available to school children that would have never have been tolerated in our days as young school children by our parents Vatican II and the Novus Ordo did not cause all or any of this. Put the blame where it belongs, Satan attacking the Church. Not the Church attacking the Church.

1. You question pre Vatican II abuses and documentation. I have no book references for you, only lived experiences of 12-15 minute masses, which I personally served as the altar boy. I think the most I did was 4 in one hour at a priests retreat. Mind you that was as the altar server, in Latin, ;As far as the documents for the Novus Ordo lending themselves to abuse, I would say that anything in writing can lend itself to abuse. This is from the Celebrant, not the writings. What we each get out of the mass comes from our disposition entering mass, not the attitude of the priest.

I am happy you pray for the priests, all the way up to Pope Benedict. Pray for deacons too. We need it. I will tell of one story of Pope John Paul II with his address here in the U.S. to deacons back in 1987. His welcome was that he was overjoyed to be with a gathering of his fellow deacons. (I was not ordained a deacon until 1991). He said this because the order of diaconate is permanent. As pope, he has the diaconate, the priesthood and episcopacy. This was his welcome which everyone remembered.
Hopefully I have answered all of your questions,
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[ProVobis]

Abuses took and take place under either form. All abuses are wrong. I remember pre Vatican II masses, the Tridentine Mass, where mass was celebrated in less than 15 minutes. Some as short of 12. I heard of some shorter, but did not witness them. it was not the form of the mass that caused the abuses, it was the individual priest, just as those with the Novus Ordo.

If the Latin were garbled, then I would agree with you. Today I really would love to hear anyone say all those Latin prayers, including an average length Epistle and Gospel distinctly in less than 12 minutes. On the other hand, I could easily hear someone reciting the vernacular Mass of the shorter Novus Ordo in that time. I bet you could even do it.

But the truth is, take away the sermon and communion, both rites are equally as long (or short).

 

[SFD]

Correct me if I am wrong, but did not the Holy Father use these English words for the consecration during the Novus Ordo? That would certainly be good enough for me. If not for you, than all I can say, is you will be in my prayers.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Well, Deacon Ed B, a deliberate mistranslation is still a problem even if the pope uses the mistranslation. The real question would be how to explain why a pope was using a mistranslation. We would not want to use the mistranslation ourselves.

Btw, there’s no uncertainty about the main question of fact here…it was a deliberate mistranslation.

SFD

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

1. You question pre Vatican II abuses and documentation. I have no book references for you, only lived experiences of 12-15 minute masses, which I personally served as the altar boy. I think the most I did was 4 in one hour at a priests retreat. Mind you that was as the altar server, in Latin,

The only “abuse” I have ever heard about the Old Mass is that some Priests said it fast. This is repeated by virtually everyone who prefers the Novus Ordo Mass in an attempt to pretend that the regular and outrageous abuses that take place in the New Mass are nothing new.

Here’s my questions: How is it an abuse to say the prayers fast? It may be irreverent, but is it an abuse? Do the rubrics specify how long that Mass should take, or how slowly the prayers should be annunciated? If not, then saying the prayers quickly is not an abuse.

 

[ProVobis]

If the form we presently use has been OKed by Rome, which it has, it is a correct form. To deny this would be to deny the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I for one cannot and will not believe that the words OKed for consecration by Rome would be incorrect and not validly consecrate the Eucharist.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Depends on what you mean by “OKed” by Rome. Paul VI, who wasn’t very versed in English, trusted the ICEL for correct translations. So much so, the English translation was used as a basis for translations into other languages as well. One can easily see the problem with this. Probably because of the silent protest and criticisms and doubts of validity, the Vatican has since admitted the error and is trying to correct it. THAT there is no doubt of.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

The only “abuse” I have ever heard about the Old Mass is that some Priests said it fast. This is repeated by virtually everyone who prefers the Novus Ordo Mass in an attempt to pretend that the regular and outrageous abuses that take place in the New Mass are nothing new.

Here’s my questions: How is it an abuse to say the prayers fast? It may be irreverent, but is it an abuse? Do the rubrics specify how long that Mass should take, or how slowly the prayers should be annunciated? If not, then saying the prayers quickly is not an abuse.

To borrow a phrase from traditionalist, how can it be reverent when done that way? No we did not have cakes consecrated, we did not have liturgical dance or clown masses. I have seen some these with more reverence. That does not by any means excuse the abuse.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B