You May Not Like It, But the Novus Ordo is Valid...

Submitted by LocutusOP on Mon, 08/07/2017 - 23:52
Author: 

Edison Frisbee , geoff kiernan, Mary Ann Kreitzer , b of mary, Anthony Pagano , Bernadette and Mike,                     

Date: 
Monday, August 7, 2017 - 23:30
Article link: 
You May Not Like It, But the Novus Ordo is Valid...
Edison Frisbee said...

Mere "validity" is setting the bar kind of low....I blame the Novus Ordo for a good part of the collapse of the Faith today - the understanding that the Mass is first and foremost a sacrifice has been lost; likewise the purpose of priesthood. Communion in the hand is icing on the cake. All of the good ends that the Novus Ordo promised to deliver never materialized....it's been a disaster and it is rightfully criticized.

August 5, 2017 at 10:28 AM

 

geoff kiernan said...

" You may not like it but the Novus Ordo is valid"

Some are, Most are not. . One concern of mine is that most NOM Priests makes no attempt or are oblivious to the Mass as being a Sacrifice.They refer to It as a Eucharistic Meal or the "Supper of the Lord" or the Consecrated Species as the 'Holy Bread of Jesus' or something equally bizarre. They have no concept of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, being a " Sacrifice". This misconception is compounded by the almost universal abuse of refusing to Genuflect before the Tabernacle/Blessed Sacrament at any time before during or after the (m)ass. This as it is, is a failure to comply with the intent of the Church thereby making their little fantasy not Valid.

August 5, 2017 at 10:33 AM

...

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

I don't disagree, Edison, that validity sets a low bar. But some are claiming that the N.O. is invalid by its nature. Since several Eucharistic miracles have occurred with hosts consecrated at N.O. Masses, I find that hard to believe. I would prefer the Mass had not changed by I agree with Cardinal Sarah that some changes were good -- the expanded Scripture readings, for example.

Geoff, maybe I live in a bubble, but in my diocese MOST N.O. Masses are said with reverence and clear recognition of the sacrifice. (Diocese of Arlington) There are a few loony-tune priests and I avoid those parishes. The last Mass I went to away from my home parish (in Fredericksburg, VA at St. Mary's) was very reverent, good homily, Latin hymn sung after Communion (Salve Regina), and an impressive organist. The congregation all sang -- beautifully (no Kumbaya songs). The sign of peace was subdued. It was an edifying service and I praised the priest after Mass.

August 5, 2017 at 2:25 PM

 

b of mary said...

Our Lady of Good Success said that we would live in a time of great compromise. That is what we have settled to do - compromise the Truth. If we study how the Mass has been attacked through the centuries, we would defend the Tridentine Mass. Martin Luther attacked the Mass, with the Freemasons supporting him in Germany. Queen Elizabeth (daughter of King Henry VIII) changed the Catholic Mass for her country in the hopes that Protestants and Catholics would both be happy but many Catholics DIED for the True Sacrificial Mass including St. Margaret Clithrow and St. Edmund Campion rather than attend this "New Mass". Our "New Mass" is worse than Martin Luther's Mass and Queen Elizabeth's Anglican Mass and was created by the Freemasons who infiltrated the Church. Check out who Msgr. Annibale Bugnini was - the master mind of this New Mass. We can see the destruction of the Faith with the New Mass - How many more Church closings do we need to wake up! Recommended reading: The Mass by Rev. Joseph A Dunney and The Problems with the New Mass by Rama P Coomaraswamy. May Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament pray for our heroic virtue in defending the Sacrificial Mass that the Council of Trent defended against Martin Luther and all Protestants.

August 5, 2017 at 3:59 PM
Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

So are you saying the Novus Ordo is invalid?

August 5, 2017 at 8:40 PM
Anthony Pagano said...

In agreement with "b of mary" there is a body of credible, written works which support the contention that there are grave doubts about the validity of the Novus Ordo mass (as implemented in 1970). A most recent work recently published by Loreto Press ("The Destruction of the Roman Rite") is a case in point. Having recently read much of this body-----which included excerpts from Bugnini's 1000+ page tome detailing, with pride, the way in which he maneuvered the conversion of the Mass of a millennium to a service which is almost indistinguishable from a Lutheran one (merely retaining some of the Catholic Trappings)----I have serious doubts and have ceased attending.

More than one Marian Apparition has warned of the Church being attacked from its top. Forewarned is forearmed. And while most of us in the US are deprived of an unequivocally valid Catholic Mass we need not despair as long as the BVM, the Paraclete, our Guardian Angel and our Patron Saints are with us.

August 5, 2017 at 9:26 PM
Bernadette and Mike said...

Sorry so late in response. According to the Church, we need proper matter, form and intention for the Sacrament to be valid. As we all know, the form of the Consecration was changed (fixed) by Pope Benedict (before he left) to address all those who cried about this flaw in the words of Consecration. He changed it back to "many" from "all" BUT - the words of Consecration are still different in the Tridentine rite from the Novus Ordo rite. Is it valid? In some churches they add more than flour and water to the matter of the hosts. Is it valid? And as we know the intention of many priests may not be there - why? They do not believe in the Real Presence. Is it valid?

I won't stick around to see but I see the "wonderful fruits" it has brought - you will find me at the Tridentine Mass. Sorry!

Like I said - if you study and read the words of those involved in the creation of the Novus Ordo - you will see that it was their intention to horribly alter the rite which they are suppose to pass down from generation to generation - not alter.

The picture of Pope Paul VI stands out in my mind of him standing with the Protestant ministers that were invited to help in this "New" Mass. The saints of old (who died for this Mass) I am sure were delighted to see from up above.

May we return to all the Traditions that were suppose to be passed down to us but were stolen.

Our Lady of Fatima - pray for us!

August 6, 2017 at 7:58 AM
Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

I don't disagree with those who believe the Tridentine Mass is superior and that the changes in the Mass were done by men with an agenda.

My only point is that the Novus Ordo under most circumstances is a valid Mass. If it isn't, then how could the Eucharistic miracles take place?

https://lesfemmes-thetruth.blogspot.com/2016/12/summer-2016-newsletter-n...

If transubstantian did NOT occur then there is no body of Christ. It seems like there are more and more miracles taking place from Masses that some are claiming to be invalid. So if it's just bread, why would it become flesh and blood? It makes no sense.

I'm all for a return to a more reverent Mass -- both the Tridentine and the ad orientem Latin Novus Ordo. But I just don't see most people demanding it. And I don't believe God wants to starve His children. So, by all means, let's promote and work for the extraordinary form, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater or turn those who prefer the ordinary form into bad guys. Some of the attitudes of those who prefer the Tridentine strike me as self-righteous and superior. That can't possibly be pleasing to the Master who was "meek and humble of heart."

August 6, 2017 at 6:54 PM

 

 

 

 

 

Own comment: 

Regarding the validity of the Novus Ordo, my own opinion is not worth much and is not one I care to print here. Suffice to say that I have attended the Novus Ordo grudgingly when no Tridentine Mass has been available, in order to comply with my Sunday obligation. I do not enjoy it. I despise it.

I only aim to  highlight 2 points written by the author of the piece, one in the piece itself, quoting a priest, and the other in the comments.

The quote in the piece was:

Of these, the ordinary form of the Latin Rite, despicably referred to as the Novus Ordo by some people, has been the target of unremitting negative attacks....

This is not the first time I have seen, in recent times, people taking offence at reference to the "Novus Ordo". Well, if you take offence then take it up with those who introduced it, since it is they who coined the term, and not the opponents of the Novus Ordo mess.

In the comment box, the  Mary Ann Kreitzer, the author, writes:

I'm all for a return to a more reverent Mass -- both the Tridentine and the ad orientem Latin Novus Ordo. But I just don't see most people demanding it....

Nobody asked for the Novus Ordo either, much less demanded it, apart from scheming modernists. People do not know what they have lost, what has been robbed of them, and we can hardly expect them to demand authentic Catholicism when all they have been fed is irreverent paganism with a slight veneer of Catholic trappings (a slight exaggeration perhaps on my part, but not by much). Neither can we expect them to demand what they do not know exists.

It is an act of charity to insist upon the imposition of the Tridentine Mass as the normative rite of the Mass as well as the abolishment of the Novus Ordo since any good in it is only there for deceptive purposes. I still maintain that a clown Novus Ordo Mass is more in keeping with the intent of the original innovators than a reverently-celebrated one.

As one of the commetor notes, the inventors of the Novus Ordo were very clear with their intentions and even boasted about their manipulation and destruction of the Roman Rite. It deserves very little respect from any sound Catholic. The saints who died for the preservation of the Mass would be appalled at it, no doubt at all about that.