CONCERNING OBJECTIONS TO CHURCH'S TEACHING ON RECEPTION OF HOLY COMMUNION BY DIVORCED AND REMARRIED

I read as far as the part about the Popes which gave us Vatican 11 not being true Popes before accepting that I had wasted my time reading it. I should have stopped when I read "sacred Latin tongue". Jesus spoke Aramaic. Much of the bible was in Greek, yet Latin is the "sacred" language.

There are some aspects of the new Mass that I could do without, but hearing Mass in a language I understand is a keeper for me. I remember when everything was in Latin, including the readings. People didn't even know which passages from the Gospel, which epistles, etc. were being read unless they had a missal and could flick through the pages fast enough to keep up with the priest. Even if they had a missal, some older members of the congregation wouldn't have been able to read it in any language. That resulted in people taking out their rosary beads and saying the Rosary all through Mass, pausing only for the Consecration. Latin might be sacred to you but Jesus managed without it and if the vernacular was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me.

There was nothing particularly reverend when priests galloped through the readings because nobody could understand them anyway. There were times when Mass lasted no more than 20 or 25 minutes if there was no homily and not many people receiving Communion. People often arrived late and left early because their Sunday obligation was fulfilled provided they were present for certain parts of the Mass. As far as I can remember, that included the Gospel reading, the Offertory, the Consecration and the Priest's Communion as well as the last reading from Sacred Scripture, which people often referred to as "the last Gospel" although it could have been any reading from scripture because it was in Latin and nobody spoke or understood Latin unless they had attended an expensive private school. One advantage of Latin was that Mass was the same in whichever European country we travelled to but most people couldn't afford to travel and anyway it only meant that we were just as detached from the proceedings abroad as we were at home.

Now, Latin may well be a beautiful, precise language, but that doesn't make it sacred and so long as the bread and wine are consecrated by a validly ordained priest acting in persona Christi and using the correct words of consecration defined by the Church, transubstantiation happens. I won't be responding to any more posts calling into question the validity of the Mass, the Second Vatican Council, Pope John XX111 or his successors. I can gripe with the best of 'em when it comes to abuses at Mass these days but questioning the validity is out of the question for me.[/QUOTE]

 

Dolours, from the last two comments you made on what goes on in mass, the mass you attend now and the one you remembered, it is clear you are of age to have known the differences. I mean no disrespect to you, but when I go to mass now and when i attended mass back then as a girl with my parents, I paid attention to the mass and nothing else. I listened. I learned, and that protected my faith from wandering off into some type of "self opinion". I wont even put a smiley face to act bashful or kindly. to me this is a serious matter of a soul that has given in to modern ideas and it must be breaking the Lord's heart.

 

[/QUOTE]

thats the whole thing dolours! the priests are not validly ordained! all that other stuff you mention is minor stuff my dear.

 

thats the whole thing dolours! the priests are not validly ordained! all that other stuff you mention is minor stuff my dear. [/QUOTE]



Which heretical cardinal of what diabolical year decreed the above blasphemous statement!

My deary me indeedy!

Please supply proof of said decree. Thank you

 

Solady,
I appreciate your attachment to the past. God has a plan and i think the vernacular was needed for the final push. If masses would have stayed in latin...i think the church would have gradually shrunk to minimal numbers. The vernacular has helped the church grow. As for there being more reverence...maybe. Im sure half the people in latin mass were waiting for it to be over. Just like in todays mass. Eventhough this debate is interesting...not sure you can say one is better or worse in Gods eyes. It just personal prefrence.

 

FS, the above statement is true at all. Since they introduced the new Mass church attendance has fallen greatly, evangelization is almost nonexistent, the few who do attend Mass are getting older by the day with few youth numbers to replace them, the current attendees as a whole also have the lowest level of believing Church teaching that has ever existed.

The Latin Mass is responsible for converting whole continents. So it is fine if you want to say you prefer the new Mass but please don't say it was necessary or that it helped the Church grow. This is simply not true.

 

I know that you addressed your comment to Fallen Saint, but I think you raise an issue of concern to everyone. I don't believe that permitting Mass to be celebrated in the vernacular is the cause of the lack of reverence for the Blessed Eucharist. The priest facing the people and various lay people on the altar might have contributed to the decline but general lack of respect in the wider community probably had a bigger effect than both those innovations. Remodelling the churches to make them similar to Methodist meeting houses was another mistake. The most damaging change, in my opinion, has been doing away with altar rails where people knelt before the Lord while receiving Him.

There were other changes apart from what was happening in the churches that also contributed to the decline, not least the failure to confront and remove clergy who dissented from Church teaching on marriage and sexual morality. And while all that was going on, the abuse scandals were bubbling under the surface. Looking back on it, the very fact that the Church has survived is proof that the Holy Spirit will always be there to pick up the pieces and get us back on track.

 

I agree with much of what you have said here Doulours. It was not only the changes to the Mass but the whole "protestantizing" and "modernization" of the Church which began in the 60's that seems to have led to the Church's decline. Personally I stick with the Latin Mass because in times of confusion we are told to stick to what the Church has always done in the past. All I know is that starting 50 years ago a lot of "innovations" began to arise and very quickly the Church began to decline. To me it seems there is a direct correlation. If God was pleased with all of these things then shouldn't the Church be thriving? It would seem so to me.

I will not claim to be a great authority on any of this. I am just a simple Catholic. So I will not try to point out flaws in each particular change that was made. I just do everything as it was done in 1959 The Church has never made any pronouncements that anything new was added to the faith since then that must be believed.

 

I would be happy to have everything about the Mass change back to the way it was pre-Vatican 11 except for the Latin......even if they kept Latin for the Consecration and had all the rest of the Mass in English. That's where I think the so-called traditionalists made their mistake. Maybe the modernists pushed them into a corner on that. I don't know enough about it. It just seems to me that insisting on the Latin was a mistake on their part, making it easier to paint them as dinosaurs standing in the way of the Church's evangelical role of preaching the Gospel to the ends of the earth. They might have had better success at preserving what was good (how we treat the Blessed Eucharist) had they not let themselves be pigeonholed by their insistence on keeping the Latin.

Like you, I'm a simple Catholic. I believe that if people aren't willing to kneel before their creator perhaps they shouldn't be lining up to receive Him. In fact, I don't believe that people were clamouring to have the altar rails removed or the Eucharist treated like a meal. That was then. With today's culture of entitlement, I'm not so sure how people would react to having to kneel at altar rails to receive the Lord. I feel privileged that I can receive and pray that I will continue to be so privileged. Mass and the Eucharist are available to me every day by way of the Novus Ordo. If that were taken away and the only option available were Latin Mass in some distant Church, I would try to the best of my ability to attend the Latin Mass. At the end of the day, it's all about valid Holy Orders and valid Consecration because that's what brings us the true Eucharist.

 

Which heretical cardinal of what diabolical year decreed that blasphemous statement!

My deary me indeedy![/QUOTE]

here is what your looking for. start there and dont stop.

POPE LEO XIII (1878-1903)

Pope Leo XIII, who had named St. Joseph as the Patron of the
Universal Church and had written an encyclical letter about him, refused
permission for the addition of the saint's name to the Canon of the
Mass, citing the tradition of the Church that the Canon was to remain
unchanged!

(Luke 12:8-12)


Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.

 

here is what your looking for. start there and dont stop.

POPE LEO XIII (1878-1903)

Pope Leo XIII, who had named St. Joseph as the Patron of the
Universal Church and had written an encyclical letter about him, refused
permission for the addition of the saint's name to the Canon of the
Mass, citing the tradition of the Church that the Canon was to remain
unchanged!

(Luke 12:8-12)


Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.
[/QUOTE]

josephite here's another one you can learn about, be blessed!

1)MAINTAINING THE COMPLETELY UNCHANGED LATIN ROMAN CATHOLIC MASS DECREE QUO PRIMUM, ST. PIUS V, JULY 19, 1570
"By this our decree, to be valid IN PERPETUITY, we determine and order that NEVER shall anything be added to, omitted from, or changed in this Missal. . .At no time in the future can a priest, whether secular or order priest, ever be forced to use any other way of saying Mass. And so as to preclude once and for all any scruples of conscience and fear of ecclesiastical penalties and censures, we herewith declare that it is in virtue of our Apostolic Authority that we decree and determine that this our present order and decree is to last in PERPETUITY and can never be legally revoked or amended at a future date. . . And if anyone would nevertheless ever dare to attempt any action contrary to this order of ours, given for all times, let him know that he has incurred the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul."

"If anyone says that the Mass ought to be celebrated in the VERNACULAR only, ... let him be anathema (cursed).

ECCUMENICAL COUNCIL OF TRENT

2) QUO PRIMUM: THE INFALLIBLE BULL OF POPE ST. PIUS V

“Quo Primum is no 'merely ecclesiastical law' (can. 11) that can be revoked, but has been enacted into law and declared Ex Cathedra to be irreformable, and is therefore a solemnly defined moral doctrine which is also of itself infallible and irreformable (DB 1819). Quo Primum has been infallibly declared to be irreformable because the rite of Mass codified (canonized) in the Tridentine Missal is the 'received and approved rite' (the rite of Sacred Tradition) [Iniunctum nobis] of the Roman Church that has been 'handed down by the Holy Roman Church' (a sacrosancta Romana Ecclesia ... tradita) [Quo Primum]. The statutes of Quo Primum, therefore, pertain to Divine Law insofar as they constitute a particular application of the divine law that has been expressed in its general formulation in the Tridentine Profession of Faith [Iniunctum nobis].” Fr. Paul L. Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.B., M.Div., A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism (Nazareth, India: Apostle Publications, [1997]).

 

This might be true in the West but in Africa and South America it has grown. Even though south america might be closer to the west then africa. To blame church for lack of attendance...nope. Try internet, TV, sport, movies, billboards, shopping malls and how about just bad parenting.

I just think the created one has all its demons working overtime. And it includes computers.

I still like the vernacular...but latin is good also. I think God understands.

Brother al

 

thank you fallen saint! as for personal preference you are right. we are either hot or cold, and must declare yes or no because anything in between is of the devil.

the bible here says: Luke 18 (deharbes bible)
And the Lord said: Hear what the unjust judge saith. And will not God revenge his elect who cry to him day and night: and will he have patience in their regard? I say to you, that he will quickly revenge them. But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?

i attended that mass as a child and i did not want it to be over! i remember my parents very well and how life was peacefull, yes we were poor but together! our Lord also said "And they brought unto him also infants, that he might touch them. Which when the disciples saw, they rebuked them. But Jesus, calling them together, said: Suffer children to come to me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Amen, I say to you: Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a child, shall not enter into it.

God Bless you

 

Dolours,
all im saying is dont be so careless as to give up your traditional Catholic Faith! look at whats happened in an area somewhere in the US:


The Novus Ordo Temple Was Burned to the Ground
But Firefighters Saved the Giant Crucifix and Virgin Statue
Which Alone Miraculously Escaped the Conflagration
The Firefighters Lovingly Handed the Historic Crucifix
As if It Were the Living Body of Christ
The Same Body that the Novus Ordo Congregants Desecrate Every Day
When the Protestant-Masonic-Pagan New Order Service Is "Performed" There

(novus ordo means new world order) look under the all seeing eye!
the very name of the church mass you attend! you either accept God or mammon.
please open your eyes! your soul is precious in His sight!


those young firefighters are God's little ones too! they probably are not even aware of the changes we older folks watched happen before our very eyes! we will have to answer to God for that some day. we cant just sit in our easy chairs and pretend to be happy with our material goods around us. we have to do something! like pray, return to the one flock as God intended it to be. The bible also says; teach them as lil children...

Hear My Teaching, My People
(Matthew 13:34-35)

Attend, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.

I will open my mouth in parables: I will utter propositions from the beginning.

How great things have we heard and known, and our fathers have told us.

They have not been hidden from their children, in another generation. Declaring the praises of the Lord, and his powers, and his wonders which he hath done.

 

I take that as a yes. You are Sede.[/QUOTE]
thats a new order word, i do not belong to the new order

 

Solady it was you who asserted that our priests are not validly ordained!
That is what is the 'blasphemous statement!'

[/QUOTE] Solady said:thats the whole thing dolours! the priests are not validly ordained! all that other stuff you mention is minor stuff my dear. [/QUOTE]


How does your argument that priests are not validly ordained, get answered by a discussion about the canon of the mass?

If somehow you are asserting that Pope Leo XIII 1878-1903 was the only valid Pope in History then maybe you are right!

However, it was in 366-384 that Pope Damasus I made a compromise of the canon between the older Greek Anaphoras and variable Latin Eucharistic prayers formerly used in Rome.

The use of Latin as a liturgical language seems to have occurred first in the Roman providence of Africa, corresponding approximately to present-day Tunisia, where knowledge of Greek was not as widespread as in Rome.

And if you want to be technical it was Pope Victor I from 190 to 202 who was born in a Roman province, who was the first to use Latin in the liturgy of Rome and then it was only used for the readings.

Your argument about the canon of the mass depends on where you believe the canon starts and finishes. By the seventh century the Canon was considered as beginning with the secret prayers after the Sanctus prior to that the preface was then still looked upon as part of the Canon.


The two views are reconciled by the distinction between the "Canon Consecrationis" and the "Canon Communionis" that occurs constantly in the Middle Ages and this still exists in the Novus Ordo Mass today.

 

To the Trads. The Traditionalist really do bore me with the insinuation that everything was hunky dory before Vatican II. Often claiming "well after Vatican II...everything fell apart...as opposed to...the "REFORMATION" that happened during the universal Latin Mass? Really? And what about what our Holy Mother has said...that at this time in history Satan has extended power. If this is so...then the Holy Spirit was acting in our Church with Vatican II to counter his shameful attack. Can you imagine if we still had the Latin Mass whilst the rest of non - Europe wakes up to Christianity? Such Euro centric arrogance! It would have murdered the Spirit of God. This business of the Mass is going to get worked out... you must let the Holy Spirit work out Gods Will. Do not stifle the Spirit. This is about what God wants and not what the controls freaks want. You do not dictate the terms of Gods Will...now or never.

 

Solady said:thats the whole thing dolours! the priests are not validly ordained! all that other stuff you mention is minor stuff my dear. [/QUOTE]


How does your argument that priests are not validly ordained, get answered by a discussion about the canon of the mass?

If somehow you are asserting that Pope Leo XIII 1878-1903 was the only valid Pope in History then maybe you are right!

However, it was in 366-384 that Pope Damasus I made a compromise of the canon between the older Greek Anaphoras and variable Latin Eucharistic prayers formerly used in Rome.

The use of Latin as a liturgical language seems to have occurred first in the Roman providence of Africa, corresponding approximately to present-day Tunisia, where knowledge of Greek was not as widespread as in Rome.

And if you want to be technical it was Pope Victor I from 190 to 202 who was born in a Roman province, who was the first to use Latin in the liturgy of Rome and then it was only used for the readings.

Your argument about the canon of the mass depends on where you believe the canon starts and finishes. By the seventh century the Canon was considered as beginning with the secret prayers after the Sanctus prior to that the preface was then still looked upon as part of the Canon.


The two views are reconciled by the distinction between the "Canon Consecrationis" and the "Canon Communionis" that occurs constantly in the Middle Ages and this still exists in the Novus Ordo Mass today.[/QUOTE]

Solady said:thats the whole thing dolours! the priests are not validly ordained! all that other stuff you mention is minor stuff my dear. [/QUOTE]


How does your argument that priests are not validly ordained, get answered by a discussion about the canon of the mass?

If somehow you are asserting that Pope Leo XIII 1878-1903 was the only valid Pope in History then maybe you are right!

However, it was in 366-384 that Pope Damasus I made a compromise of the canon between the older Greek Anaphoras and variable Latin Eucharistic prayers formerly used in Rome.

The use of Latin as a liturgical language seems to have occurred first in the Roman providence of Africa, corresponding approximately to present-day Tunisia, where knowledge of Greek was not as widespread as in Rome.

And if you want to be technical it was Pope Victor I from 190 to 202 who was born in a Roman province, who was the first to use Latin in the liturgy of Rome and then it was only used for the readings.

Your argument about the canon of the mass depends on where you believe the canon starts and finishes. By the seventh century the Canon was considered as beginning with the secret prayers after the Sanctus prior to that the preface was then still looked upon as part of the Canon.


The two views are reconciled by the distinction between the "Canon Consecrationis" and the "Canon Communionis" that occurs constantly in the Middle Ages and this still exists in the Novus Ordo Mass today.[/QUOTE]

my response: start there and dont stop, but you did.

for the sake of simplicity lets begin in 1960. Where most of this starts.
in 1960 - Traditional rubrics and calendar of Mass and Divine Office were changed
in 1962 sacred Aostolic Roman Canon of Mass (dogmatically not to be touched !)were changed
in 1964 - Vulgar tongues introduced into the Mass (the national or vernacular language of a people used typically to contrast such a language with Latin).
in 1967 - Dogmatic form of the Mass Consecration changed to an invalid Protestant form
in 1968 - New Ordinal to install Newbishops, Presbyters (formerly priests), and Deacons introduced after Protestant forms
in 1969 - New Order (Novus Ordo) service (no longer a valid "Mass") introduced to replace the valid Traditional Latin Mass
in 1970 - New Order "Liturgy of the Hours" introduced to replace the 2000-year traditional Catholic Divine Office

QUO PRIMUM: THE INFALLIBLE BULL OF POPE ST. PIUS V
“Quo Primum is no 'merely ecclesiastical law' (can. 11) that can be revoked, but has been enacted into law and declared Ex Cathedra to be irreformable, and is therefore a solemnly defined moral doctrine which is also of itself infallible and irreformable (DB 1819). Quo Primum has been infallibly declared to be irreformable because the rite of Mass codified (canonized) in the Tridentine Missal is the 'received and approved rite' (the rite of Sacred Tradition) [Iniunctum nobis] of the Roman Church that has been 'handed down by the Holy Roman Church' (a sacrosancta Romana Ecclesia ... tradita) [Quo Primum]. The statutes of Quo Primum, therefore, pertain to Divine Law insofar as they constitute a particular application of the divine law that has been expressed in its general formulation in the Tridentine Profession of Faith [Iniunctum nobis].” Fr. Paul L. Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.B., M.Div., A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism (Nazareth, India: Apostle Publications, [1997]).

"Furthermore, by these presents [this law] and by virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We give and grant in perpetuity that for the singing or reading of the Missal, Mass in any church whatsoever this Missal may be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure." - Pope St. Pius V, Quo Primum, July 14, 1570.

tridintine mass


canon of the mass:
“Therefore, we beseech Thee, O Lord, graciously to receive this oblation which we, Thy servants and the whole family, offer up to Thee. Dispose our days in Your peace."


novus ordo mass
canon of the mass;
As often as you do these things, ye shall do them in remembrance of Me.




creators of the new novus ordo mass below!



April 10, 1970: Paul VI thanks the 6 Protestant ministers who assisted with creation of New Mass.




In name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost! As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be world without end amen!

 

Solady said:thats the whole thing dolours! the priests are not validly ordained! all that other stuff you mention is minor stuff my dear. [/QUOTE]


How does your argument that priests are not validly ordained, get answered by a discussion about the canon of the mass?

If somehow you are asserting that Pope Leo XIII 1878-1903 was the only valid Pope in History then maybe you are right!

However, it was in 366-384 that Pope Damasus I made a compromise of the canon between the older Greek Anaphoras and variable Latin Eucharistic prayers formerly used in Rome.

The use of Latin as a liturgical language seems to have occurred first in the Roman providence of Africa, corresponding approximately to present-day Tunisia, where knowledge of Greek was not as widespread as in Rome.

And if you want to be technical it was Pope Victor I from 190 to 202 who was born in a Roman province, who was the first to use Latin in the liturgy of Rome and then it was only used for the readings.

Your argument about the canon of the mass depends on where you believe the canon starts and finishes. By the seventh century the Canon was considered as beginning with the secret prayers after the Sanctus prior to that the preface was then still looked upon as part of the Canon.


The two views are reconciled by the distinction between the "Canon Consecrationis" and the "Canon Communionis" that occurs constantly in the Middle Ages and this still exists in the Novus Ordo Mass today.[/QUOTE]

divine office
The most important prayer that the Church offers to Almighty God after the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the Officium Divinum, or Divine Office, contained in a liturgical book called theBreviarium Romanum, or Roman Breviary. In fact, the Mass is part of the Divine Office, and they are so intertwined in the public liturgy of the Church that one is really incomplete without the other. may i ask wheres yours? i have to speak the truth as a Roman Catholic it is my duty. if we don't then the following happens (see below) like it did in the novus ordo !

anathema:
is something accursed, dedicated (to evil)

 

Our Catholic Mass is nothing like protestant services!!!! Full stop!!!

We have the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus on the altar, Transubstantation has occured after the Consecrated of bread and wine by Our Validly Ordained Priests!!!!

Your above post is insulting to all Catholics and Our Lord Himself!

Going by your logic, as posted above, a valid Mass did not occur before the introduction of Latin in the year 366!

As the first Christians in Rome were chiefly people who came from the East and spoke Greek, and according to your time line above a vulgar langage!

The First Apology of Justin Martyr (circa 165) an early outline of the liturgy is found, including a celebration of the Eucharist (thanksgiving) with an Anaphora, with the final Amen celebrated in Greek!


Additionally, the Roman Canon is not in its primitive form. Transitions, show that it is an abbreviated and transposed version of a more ancient eucharistic prayer. Since 1474 it was printed in paragraphs, marked with initial letters and divided by rubrics (so that some pre-Vatican II missal users took it to be a set of discrete prayers). Several of the paragraphs had a conclusion – Per Christum Dominum Nostrum – with interpolated Amens.

Jesus is trully present in Our Novus Ordo Masses!

In my opinion people who say Jesus is not present by virtue of invalidly ordained priests, are contributing to and are therefore guilty of, complicity in the sacrilege, of Eucharistic abuses to the Most Sacred and Suffering Heart of Our Lord Jesus.

Lord Have Mercy and Dearest Mother Mary Help.