We already speak of the invalidity of many Masses. But to say that all Masses are invalid does not correspond to the line of the Fraternity. This is something we have never said. In our discussions with Rome, we have always emphasised that we recognise the validity of the new Mass, if it is celebrated according to the books and with the intention of doing what the Church is mandated to do. In this regard, a distinction must be made between valid and good.

What It Means

This is a placeholder explanation generated by the low-overhead model. It interprets "We already speak of the invalidity of many Masses. But to say that all Masses are invalid does not correspond to the line of the Fraternity. This is something we have never said. In our discussions with Rome, we have always emphasised that we recognise the validity of the new Mass, if it is celebrated according to the books and with the intention of doing what the Church is mandated to do. In this regard, a distinction must be made between valid and good." in the context of "Noi parliamo già dell'invalidità di molte Messe. Ma dire che tutte le Messe sono invalide, non corrisponde alla linea della Fraternità. È una cosa che non abbiamo mai detto. Nella discussione con Roma abbiamo sempre sottolineato di riconoscere la validità della nuova Messa, se è celebrata secondo i libri e l'intenzione di fare ciò che la Chiesa ha il mandato di compiere. Bisogna distinguere a questo riguardo tra valido e buono.
 • From an interview of Lorenzo Prezzi, Lefebvriani: il successore di Fellay. Settimana News (July 12, 2018)" to mean that wisdom is timeless.