+
JMJ
An interesting thing has happened on the discussion that prompted my article on whether it is sinful to attend the Novus Ordo Missae. The blog owner of RDCC has shut down discussion by locking the article.
That is their prerogative, but I am puzzled as to why? Perhaps it has something to do with some of the latter comments.
- They didn't believe the teaching on intention with regards to confecting the Sacraments. This is not the first time I've experienced incredulity on this topic (reference articles). Really this isn't about what they believe but the truth.
- They seem to believe that the objections to the Novus Ordo Missae are simply about "overly delicate sensibilities". In response to this I am reblogging a number of articles by the SSPX.
- Perhaps it was the comment made by Bishop Schneider, a currently well revered hero (who deserved the accolades) but apparently has said something similar to the SSPX.
I am praying that this was a momentary lapse on his part. However, the SSPX's lapse is more than momentary.
The mouthpiece of Tradition, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, formed the centerpiece of the conference, delivering the keynote address as well as a short talk against Communion in the hand. He has been increasingly vocal against the Vatican II springtime, which has been a welcome relief of honestly facing the crisis as it has been continuing to unravel for decades.
His comments on the liturgy were salient on this. He said the New Mass is “substantially a clear weakening of the truth of the sacrificial character of the Mass.” It represents a “shift to the Protestant meaning and sense of the meal … in the text [of the Mass] itself.” Indeed, “The Novus Ordo is the Extraordinary Form.”
He observed that even Paul VI admitted that Communion in the hand would indeed weaken the faith but then allowed it in the same document. The good bishop compared this to a doctor who says to his patient about a treatment, “This will harm you” and then decides to give it to him anyway.
He censured Communion in the hand emphatically: “We cannot use the same gesture for the Holy Sacrament as common food.” It has a deeply psychological effect, eroding our faith in the Real Presence. Instead, we must receive Holy Communion on the tongue and on our knees. Like little children who cannot feed themselves, we receive the Holy Sacrament from Holy Mother Church.Source: 1P5
In the final analysis this emerging from this crisis requires Catholics to accept the reality of the situation.
... and ensure that their response is Catholic in all aspects.
P^3
=========== Partial Restore DC Catholicism Thread ===========
- It appears they have a pretty good basis for their "opinion" that the NO is a danger to the Faith.
Mass attendance has gone from something like 65% to 24% under the Novus Ordo....and the percentage of Catholics who go to Mass AND actually believe in the Real Presence is even less. And don't ignore the precipitous drop in vocations...(except in...wait for it....Traditional orders).
"Lex orandi, lex credendi" isn't some trite cliche.
Still awaiting your equally robust condemnation of Bishop Schneider.
- Let's handle the first assertion first.
The intention is to do what the Church does. In confecting the Eucharist all that is required is: A. Proper form (words), B. Matter (Bread & Wine), C. Intention (to confect the Eucharist) D. A validly ordained priest.
The intention to commit sacrilege after the fact is an intention that is separate from the act.
More here: http://tradicat.blogspot.com/2017/04/form-matter-and-intention.html
Let's be clear - this is not about the Third Commandment - which requires us to keep the Lord's day. Which can be done in number of ways and is guaranteed by attending Mass.
This <<< is >>> about the first precept of the Catholic Church - which requires us to "attend Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation".
There are a couple of problems with your article.
First, the SSPX asserts that the Novus Ordo is valid with the normal conditions (form, matter and intention). What they do claim is that the Novus Ordo Mass, valid as it may be, constitutes a danger to the faith of those attending.
Regarding your 'grin and bear it' approach.
Second, validity is not the only criteria, the liturgy has a great importance and effect on those present. For example, you could attend a valid 'black mass', but it would obviously be sinful to do so.
If the Novus Ordo Missae which you are attending, contains various abuses or worse - then you have an obligation to leave or protest the abuse right then and there. Otherwise you are potentially committing a sin of omission. If you have children with you, then you have to consider the effect on them and their faith as well as your own.
Let's say that you find a perfect Novus Ordo Missae celebrated as promulgated.
Meaning, Ad Orientem, in Latin, with no altar girls and no lay Eucharistic Ministers, with all the "smells and bells" etc.
Then the argument is lesser but I would hold still applicable because the exclusions from the Novus Ordo Missae are comparable to reciting the Creed without the Filioque. While not explicitly heretical, it still leaves unsaid something that should said.
P^3