|
Forums26
Topics35,537
Posts417,732
Members6,188
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
But as I mentioned they do not question its objective validity as a Mass, only that some (perhaps most in their minds) celebrations of it are invalid. Which is heresy by memo's standard.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405 |
[...] At various times priests and perhaps one Bishop of the Lefebvrists have been reconciled to the full unity of the Catholic Church; there has been no hint of any re-ordination of such clergy. [...]
Fr. Serge Yes, Bishop Licínio Rangel was indeed reconciled to and died in full communion with the Catholic Church. May he rest in peace. Source:AUTOGRAPH LETTER OF JOHN PAUL II
...F ST JOHN MARY VIANNEY OF CAMPOS, BRAZIL [ vatican.va]
Last edited by Latin Catholic; 01/28/09 05:22 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,036 Likes: 4
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,036 Likes: 4 |
But as I mentioned they do not question its objective validity as a Mass, only that some (perhaps most in their minds) celebrations of it are invalid. If a properly ordained priest celebrates the Pauline Mass with the proper form and correct intention, they accept that it is valid. There are some traditionalists who reject the objective validity of the Pauline Mass, no matter how it is celebrated. There is really no hope for reconciliation with those people without them simply changing their minds. I haven't read any of their materials in a long time, but I recall that: 1) Archbishop Lefebvre refused to acknowledge the form as valid. Specifically, he rejected the validity of some of the Eucharistic Prayers. 2) An offer was made by Rome (JPII, iirc) to celebrate the new mass a single time with the Pope as the condition for regularization of the suspended order, and was rejected. hawk
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133 |
But as I mentioned they do not question its objective validity as a Mass, only that some (perhaps most in their minds) celebrations of it are invalid. Which is heresy by memo's standard. Please do not presume to speak my mind. This is clearly not what I said. Priests (and even bishops) can invalidly celebrate Mass according to the Pauline rite. That doesn't make the rite itself illegitimate. If the SSPX grievance is against specific instances, then they are not questioning the authority of the Pope, but rather the skills and intentions of specific celebrants. In this case, they may be right or wrong about their concerns, but either way, they have the right to express them. But we'll see... Shalom, Memo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
What the SSPX rejects is not merely a specific translation, but rather the validity of the Pauline reforms to the Roman rite.
While the reform is being considered, you can make all the observations your conscience dictates, but once the Pope approves it, it is valid and licit.
The only way to object to its validity is by challenging the authority of the Pope to approve such reforms in the first place.
If this is actually their position, it is material heresy. It is what you said.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Grateful Member
|
|
Grateful Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528 |
I'm not even sure where that horizon is - certainly it's not in view Well, there is hope on the horizon: Pope expresses hope for full communion with traditionalist society [ catholicnews.com] Pope condemns Holocaust denial [ catholicnews.com] Pope says Christian unity can prove that division isn't inevitable [ catholicnews.com] The last lines from that last story leave me feeling better than I have in days: Addressing the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican and Protestant bishops, clergy and laity who participated in the prayer service, the pope said that as long as all Christians seek unity in faith their different spiritualities, rituals and customs do not have to be divisive.
"In that way our diversity will no longer be an obstacle that separates us, but a richness in the multiplicity of expressions of a common faith," he said. -- John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,231
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,231 |
Be that as it may--the man should be censured by his superiors, whoever they are. If I, at my secular, for profit corporation dared to make such a remark, I'd be out on the street with no job or benefits. Yet this "Christian churchman" dares to make such a statement and he continues in his "job." The dear "bishop" should get out more and travel. I've been to Auschwitz/Birkenau and re-live the horror of that visit in my dreams. Didn't the old prayer on Good Friday for the Jewish people talk about removing a veil from (their) eyes? Maybe we should pray that prayer for "Bishop" Williamson instead.
Last edited by John K; 01/30/09 12:58 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 478
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 478 |
John K,
When the prodigal son came back to his father, I don't remember the father scolding the son for all his past sins. He simply rejoiced in his return. Let's not be the older brother in this story of reconciliation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,133 |
What the SSPX rejects is not merely a specific translation, but rather the validity of the Pauline reforms to the Roman rite.
While the reform is being considered, you can make all the observations your conscience dictates, but once the Pope approves it, it is valid and licit.
The only way to object to its validity is by challenging the authority of the Pope to approve such reforms in the first place.
If this is actually their position, it is material heresy. It is what you said. Thank you for quoting me. My original text clearly shows that I DID NOT say what you claim I said. Case closed. Shalom, Memo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
Well, there is the case of the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
John,
Even Judas "if" he repented could have been forgiven and received back as an Apostle. Our Lord would do it,
should'nt you?
Stephanos I
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
Said by Francis But as I mentioned they do not question its objective validity as a Mass, only that some (perhaps most in their minds) celebrations of it are invalid. Said by Me Which is heresy by memo's standard. Said by Memo What the SSPX rejects is not merely a specific translation, but rather the validity of the Pauline reforms to the Roman rite.
While the reform is being considered, you can make all the observations your conscience dictates, but once the Pope approves it, it is valid and licit.
The only way to object to its validity is by challenging the authority of the Pope to approve such reforms in the first place.
If this is actually their position, it is material heresy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
It is certainly not heretical to say that some "Masses" said in vague accordance with the Novus Ordo are invalid - John Paul II said the same thing regarding "Masses" said using invalid matter, which was a fairly widespread offense.
If it's any consolation, earlier in the twentieth century a similar problem arose because certain suppliers of hosts whose theological knowledge did not match their esthetics were using rice flour instead of wheat flour for the hosts! This, of course, does not produce valid bread for the Roman Mass. The resulting situation was quite a cause celebre.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
It appears that acceptance of Vatican II is not an option from the Holy Father's public audience: "I hope my gesture is followed by the hoped-for commitment on their part to take the further steps necessary to realize full communion with the church, thus witnessing true fidelity, and true recognition of the magisterium and the authority of the pope and of the Second Vatican Council," he said. HHB16 is one who says what he means.
|
|
|
|
|
