Adrien
282.3K
mccallansteve
The NO is odious to God.
Ultraviolet
He's appointed you His spokesman, amirite?
occasnltrvlr
The "Novus Odious." Now that's funny! 🤭
Les Crispi
The NO is only valid insofar as it was always viewed as an option to the Mass of the Ages. Should Bergie the heretic succeed in suppressing the TLM for good, the NO will be invalid.
Ultraviolet
The Novus Ordo Mass isn't invalid, though. Not according to The Church. Likewise for "Bergie" being a "heretic".
Les Crispi
I didn't say it was invalid. I said if the TLM is completely suppressed, it would be. The NO only exists because TLM is a backstop. That is the rationale behind it. Bergie the heretic is trying very hard to get rid of the TLM. Should that happen, NO would be invalid.
Ultraviolet
"I didn't say it was invalid." You did. You wrote: "The NO is only valid insofar..." So you ARE saying it's invalid but you're applying qualifications to when it's invalid. Further underscored by your last statment. "Should that happen, NO would be invalid."

..and it would not. Both are valid forms of the Mass. If one form was suppressed, the other form remains valid.
occasnltrvlr
Could you please elaborate on how the validity of one form of the Mass is somehow dependent upon the practice of another form of the Mass? Are there time or distance requirements here?
Les Crispi
@occasnltrvir the church at Trent defined the mass of the ages and basically said it cannot be changed. When the Novus Ordo was created, the only way they could sell it was by calling it an extension or option of the TLM. If it was a brand new mass it would be anathema. So that's why they kept the TLM. Actually ,it's supernaturally protected, the TLM, so it can't be destroyed. But if Bergolio …More
@occasnltrvir the church at Trent defined the mass of the ages and basically said it cannot be changed. When the Novus Ordo was created, the only way they could sell it was by calling it an extension or option of the TLM. If it was a brand new mass it would be anathema. So that's why they kept the TLM. Actually ,it's supernaturally protected, the TLM, so it can't be destroyed. But if Bergolio tries, and he is, that's how you know he's not the pope. and a heretic.
Ultraviolet
Denying the Real Presence and denying the validity of N.O. Mass are not the same. Bait 'n Switch. No surprises otherwise. Wishy-washy Novus Ordo don't know their faith (i.e. Real Presence). Dogmatic traditionalists simply ignore it when it contradicts their opinions(i.e. validity of the N.O. Mass). The Church says both forms of the Mass are valid.
Adrien
@Ultraviolet Yes for the distinction you made but the irony of the situation is worthy of being mentioned by Phil Lawler. Also you must admit this... How many of them, clergy or faithful, don't believe in Transubstantiation not because they did not learn about it but just because they don't accept this article of the Faith...
Ultraviolet
My point is the validity of the Mass doesn't depend on who believes in the miracle that occurs. A Catholic priest could celebrate the Novus Ordo form of the Mass in front of scoffing, disbelieving non-Christians and 1.) Transubstantiation would still occur and 2.) the Mass would still be valid.
Scapular
The Church insists on the exact words Our Lord Jesus Christ said in the institution of the Holy Eucharist in the upper room. These words are found precisely carefully preserved enshrined in the 1962 Missal. If you, Pope or anyone protest against this you protest against Jesus Christ.
Adrien
So the other catholic rites don't have them? And do you think they are all invalid?
Coptic ? Ethiopian ? Eritrean ?
Maronite, Syrian, Syro-Malankara?
Armenian, Chaldean, Syro-Malabar?
Byzantine? Melkite? Visigothic?
Scapular
They have what they have and we have what we have and that is good. Don’t confuse it. The argument is for the Latin Rite.
Adrien
@Scapular
1) Explain how this can even possibly work for the Latin rites and not the others!
2) Sarum rite, Visigothic (my image of a missal ) and Ambrosian (old and new) are ALSO Latin RITES!!!
Scapular
Adrien you are correct and it is carefully and diligently explained here and a person like you will enjoy this argument as it is educational. Fidelity to the Word: Fr. Meuli argues "for all" renders Mass invalid
Adrien
@Scapular

The Apostles and their successors didn’t want to recreate the Last Supper because inspired by the Holy Ghost, they knew that the Words of the Rite of the New Covenant are ‘’This is My Body” and “This is (the Cup of) My Blood”.

It implies that when a priest says these words, the Transubstantiation occurs at this very moment. Even before he starts the additional wording.

For the pro …More
@Scapular

The Apostles and their successors didn’t want to recreate the Last Supper because inspired by the Holy Ghost, they knew that the Words of the Rite of the New Covenant are ‘’This is My Body” and “This is (the Cup of) My Blood”.

It implies that when a priest says these words, the Transubstantiation occurs at this very moment. Even before he starts the additional wording.

For the pro multis or pro omnibus, both can be used but in a time when the heresy of systematic salvation is on trend, I understand that some people want the pro multis in the Mass, but there are other occasions to announce that salvation is not the only destiny possible and anyhow, the pro omnibus doesn't mean that in the first place.

Even if many will be deprived from the benefit of Salvation in Hell, the fact that the Work of Redemption is for everyone and that the Son of God suffers for all men and that His Blood is shed for all (in vain for many), is strongly et repeatedly affirmed in the Divinely inspired Holy Scriptures:

1 Timothy 2:5-6 “For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus: Who gave himself a redemption for all, a testimony in due times”.

1 Timothy 4:10 “... we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.”

John 1:29 “Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world”

1 John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 John 4:14 “And we have seen and do testify that the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world.”

Any priest or scholar who claims the PRO OMNIBUS renders the Mass invalid is a False Doctor.


-----------------------------------------------------
Scapular, you wrote: "If you,... protest against this you protest against Jesus Christ."

My answer: I gave you an elaborated explanation. Do the same. Explain your reasoning if any, please!
Cat Smith
Satan wants to destroy THE Mass. Obviously, the novus ordo is not THE Mass if Bergoglio wants to impose it on the universal Church.
Adrien
Not quite but Francis has a big surprise for the Church, a novelty from the "spirit", so the Ancient Rite is an obstacle on the way because of its hardly alterable codification, and also on average the better religious fidelity, steadfastness of its ministers and faithfuls.
Laura Yunque
Would you like to explain this statement further? Do you know what the surprise is?
Adrien
@Laura Yunque Yes. Francis likes to talk about "the newness and surprises of the spirit" and his "god of surprises." He wants a smooth, peaceful and global acceptation of the project he is campaigning for since he is in Rome. It will become tangible in a new reformative ceremony.
It will include a silent breaking of bread (no words of consecration) and everyone raising above their heads an …More
@Laura Yunque Yes. Francis likes to talk about "the newness and surprises of the spirit" and his "god of surprises." He wants a smooth, peaceful and global acceptation of the project he is campaigning for since he is in Rome. It will become tangible in a new reformative ceremony.
It will include a silent breaking of bread (no words of consecration) and everyone raising above their heads an object related to their personal faith.
Laura Yunque
Thank you for responding. Is this innovation something you think will happen or do you know with certainty? Is this your opinion or state of fact?
Adrien
@Laura Yunque You are welcome.

State of fact? I will let you be the judge of that. What I can do is to give you a little insight of where I am coming from. Keep in mind that English is a foreign language for me.

First, there is the part of the Divine Revelation concerning the coming of the False Prophet (not the Antichrist but someone else), the Perpetual Sacrifice (the Holy Mass) being …More
@Laura Yunque You are welcome.

State of fact? I will let you be the judge of that. What I can do is to give you a little insight of where I am coming from. Keep in mind that English is a foreign language for me.

First, there is the part of the Divine Revelation concerning the coming of the False Prophet (not the Antichrist but someone else), the Perpetual Sacrifice (the Holy Mass) being abolished by him and instead the establishment of the abomination of desolation (Book of Daniel, Gospel of Mathew, Book of Revelation).

Then, through the centuries, there were several saints and prophets (Saint Francis of Assisi, Blessed Ann Catherine Emmerich, Leo XIII, Don Stefano Gobbi, Vassula Ryden, etc.) who spoke about that or parts of this unfolding of future events.

So, what I am doing is sharing my understanding of all those readings, and since I am convinced, I consider that I have reached the level of certainty. Also, nothing prevents the occurring of other impressive and unexpected events in the meantime.
Laura Yunque
Based upon these factors, your theory makes a lot of sense. Thank you for the explanation.
가입을 원합니다
Don Stefano Gobbi 's Fake Messages ?
Is It Catholic? - Father Stefano Gobbi (catholicdoors.com)
Library : The Marian Movement of Priests: Is It Safe for Faithful Catholics? | Catholic Culture

comments :
" I read about Fr. Gobbi. He sounded quite legitimate. Many photos showed him with JPII. But I forgot that JPII supported many groups which turned out to be questionable. Legionaries of Christ, …More
Don Stefano Gobbi 's Fake Messages ?
Is It Catholic? - Father Stefano Gobbi (catholicdoors.com)
Library : The Marian Movement of Priests: Is It Safe for Faithful Catholics? | Catholic Culture

comments :
" I read about Fr. Gobbi. He sounded quite legitimate. Many photos showed him with JPII. But I forgot that JPII supported many groups which turned out to be questionable. Legionaries of Christ, Fraternity of St. John, Taize, Neocateumenical Way, etc "

" Specifically, Fr. Gobbi claimed that in 1989 he received a vision that in 1998

nicknamed him "that crazy lunatic". Fr. Gobbi claimed e.g.: - that Medjugorje was true: 3rd July 1987..

This and according to Fr. Gobbi 's vision by 1998-1999 the Church was to be turned into an anti-church....

That crazy lunatic Don Gobbi" as late Fr. Gregorius Hesse called him…

well, not by the locutions of, for example, some Fr. Gobbi, who said that at the end of the 1990s (...
That crazy lunatic Don Gobbi" - jak mawiał ś.p. ks. Grzegorz Hesse

changed between 1988 when don Gobbi supposedly received this "prophecy" and 1998? Nothing: still John Paul ..."

PS. I was also a member of the Marian Movement for priests.
123jussi
The point is that it is evil as it lacks the good that ought to be there!
John A Cassani
I can only be happy that a good man like Phil Lawler is coming towards the light. He’s right; most NO pewsitters regard the NO as de facto, invalid. However, the same people wouldn’t regard the TLM as valid either, because their faith is dead. Trads can be divided into 3 categories, I suppose. The reluctant Trads, like Lawler, are those who really wish the NO could be redeemed, but are just fed …More
I can only be happy that a good man like Phil Lawler is coming towards the light. He’s right; most NO pewsitters regard the NO as de facto, invalid. However, the same people wouldn’t regard the TLM as valid either, because their faith is dead. Trads can be divided into 3 categories, I suppose. The reluctant Trads, like Lawler, are those who really wish the NO could be redeemed, but are just fed up with abuses that show no sign of being addressed. Most Trads, including the SSPX, I believe, can allow that the NO is valid, but reject it as being defective, and want to go nowhere near it. I’m sure the third category, of those who say it’s invalid exists, but it is a small contingent. Rome tolerated those who reject the NO, in practice, up until TC, as long as priests were not actively prevented from saying the NO. Now, it seems like they want to require the “pinch of incense.”