Validity of the New Order

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

many trads say the mass proglumated by Paul VI, may be invalid, becasue he did not use his office to proglumate it, Because (unlike other bulls) He did not say "I define"


Is this true?



sam

[Cam42]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 16 2006, 10:14 PM']many trads say the mass proglumated by Paul VI, may be invalid, becasue he did not use his office to proglumate it, Because (unlike other bulls) He did not say "I define"
Is this true?
sam
[right][snapback]858281[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No. If you look to what Pope Paul VI states at the end of the promulgating document [url="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6missal.htm"]Missale Romanum[/url], you'll see that while he doesn't say, "I define....," he does say;

[quote name='Pope Paul VI; Missale Romanum']We decree that these laws and prescriptions be firm and effective now and in the future, notwithstanding, to the extent necessary, the apostolic constitutions and ordinances issued by our predecessors and other prescriptions, even those deserving particular mention and amendment.[/quote]

This is a definitive statement of the same vein as a defining document which states, "I define...." The meanings are synonomous.


Furthermore, unity is expected as is stated:

[quote name='Pope Paul VI; Missale Romanum']When he promulgated the editio princeps of the Roman Missal, our predecessor St. Pius V offered it to the people of Christ as the instrument of liturgical unity and the expression of a pure and reverent worship in the Church. Even though, in virtue of the decree of the Second Vatican Council, we have accepted into the new Roman Missal lawful variations and adaptations, our own expectation in no way differs from that of our predecessor.[/quote]
(cf. Sacrosanctum Concilum, nos.38-40.)